---------------------------------------------------------- KIS-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Wed 10/27/10: 15 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 04:33 AM - KIS TR-1C Autopilot () 2. 05:05 AM - Re: KIS TR-1C Autopilot (Galin Hernandez) 3. 05:50 AM - Re: KIS Sold (Mark Kettering) 4. 06:00 AM - Re: KIS Sold (Mark Kettering) 5. 09:01 AM - Re: KIS Sold (Jason Hills) 6. 09:11 AM - Re: KIS TR-1C Autopilot (Jason Hills) 7. 10:10 AM - Re: KIS Sold (Richard Trickel) 8. 10:11 AM - Re: Re: KIS TR-1C Autopilot (Richard Trickel) 9. 12:04 PM - Re: KIS Sold (jason@hills.org) 10. 12:40 PM - Re: KIS Sold (Richard Trickel) 11. 02:01 PM - Re: KIS Sold (F. Tim Yoder) 12. 02:23 PM - KIS2 Seat issue...absorb shock on impact (Conners, Jerry L) 13. 02:35 PM - Re: KIS2 Seat issue...absorb shock on impact (Conners, Jerry L) 14. 03:43 PM - Re: KIS Sold (jason@hills.org) 15. 06:43 PM - Re: KIS TR-1C Autopilot () ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 04:33:01 AM PST US From: Subject: KIS-List: KIS TR-1C Autopilot 10/27/2010 Hello Jason, You wrote: "....then probably adding a TruTrak autopilot coupled to the 430W..." I know that Tru Trak is the big bear in the autopilot market, but before you go that way please take a close look at the Trio Avionics products: http://www.trioavionics.com/ My hangar partner has a Tru Trak autopilot in his RV-7 and he was not completely satisfied with it so I put an EZ Pilot control head in my KIS TR-1 coupled to my GNS 430W. I used their wiring harness adapter and my already installed Navaid AP 1 servo. It works great and I am very satisfied with it. 'OC' Baker Says: "The best investment we can make is the time and effort to gather and understand knowledge." ========================================================== Scott/Mark, I'm not planning any major engine upgrades for my plane, at least not just yet... I just overhauled the engine 2 years ago. Current projects are getting the bugs out of the new engine monitor system (JPI EDM 740), improving engine cooling (problems found with the new engine monitor), then probably adding a TruTrak autopilot coupled to the 430W, and upgrading to a more efficient prop. Maybe after all of that if I need more speed I'll consider doing some upgrades to the engine.... For whoever asked, my plane is a taildragger, and I did add gear leg intersection fairings this past summer. We considered fairing the legs themselves, but decided it probably wasn't really worth the effort, at least for now. Of course I'm also building an RV-8 in my garage. Not because the KIS isn't a good plane, just because I want to build an RV. I do appreciate the short field performance, lower stall speed and higher aerobatic g-limits of the RV (compared to the KIS), and I really like the tandem design. Plus I didn't build my KIS, and I'm having a lot of fun building. Although I've learned a TON working on the TR-1c the past 5.5 years... having now pretty much redone the firewall forward and the panel. ...Jason ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 05:05:56 AM PST US From: Galin Hernandez Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS TR-1C Autopilot I have to add to what OC stated regarding the TRIO autopilot. Dave installed the TRIO with altitude hold and it was an excellent choice. I have it slaved to my 430W and 496 via a selector switch and I can't say enough about it. My long flights are much more enjoyable by letting "Otto" fly for a while. I had one issue with the TRIO drifting off course but Chuck, from TRIO, fixed it for free even though the initial install appeared to cause the problem. I recommend it as a stand alone autopilot with the GOLD standard servo instead of the NAVAID servos. Galin N819PR On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 6:27 AM, wrote: > > 10/27/2010 > > Hello Jason, You wrote: "....then probably adding a TruTrak autopilot > coupled to the 430W..." > > I know that Tru Trak is the big bear in the autopilot market, but before > you go that way please take a close look at the Trio Avionics products: > > http://www.trioavionics.com/ > > My hangar partner has a Tru Trak autopilot in his RV-7 and he was not > completely satisfied with it so I put an EZ Pilot control head in my KIS > TR-1 coupled to my GNS 430W. I used their wiring harness adapter and my > already installed Navaid AP 1 servo. It works great and I am very satisfied > with it. > > 'OC' Baker Says: "The best investment we can make is the time and effort to > gather and understand knowledge." > > ========================================================== > > Scott/Mark, > > I'm not planning any major engine upgrades for my plane, at least not just > yet... I just overhauled the engine 2 years ago. > > Current projects are getting the bugs out of the new engine monitor system > (JPI EDM 740), improving engine cooling (problems found with the new engine > monitor), then probably adding a TruTrak autopilot coupled to the 430W, and > upgrading to a more efficient prop. Maybe after all of that if I need more > speed I'll consider doing some upgrades to the engine.... > > For whoever asked, my plane is a taildragger, and I did add gear leg > intersection fairings this past summer. We considered fairing the legs > themselves, but decided it probably wasn't really worth the effort, at least > for now. > > Of course I'm also building an RV-8 in my garage. Not because the KIS isn't > a good plane, just because I want to build an RV. I do appreciate the short > field performance, lower stall speed and higher aerobatic g-limits of the RV > (compared to the KIS), and I really like the tandem design. Plus I didn't > build my KIS, and I'm having a lot of fun building. Although I've learned a > TON working on the TR-1c the past 5.5 years... having now pretty much redone > the firewall forward and the panel. > > ...Jason > > ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 05:50:15 AM PST US From: Mark Kettering Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold Hi John, I think Scott answered 1 and 3. I do not know how large the Lancair cockpit is. I remember seeing a web page that listed cockpit widths sometime ago but do not remember where. Also width does not tell the whole story. You really need to go and sit in them yourself to try them out for size and shape. Mark -----Original Message----- >From: John Petrie >Sent: Oct 26, 2010 10:53 PM >To: kis-list@matronics.com >Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold > > >Mark, > >You make a very good argument for the TR-1. I have a few questions though: >1. What do you mean by "...the wings tend to stay on"? >2. How does the cockpit size compare to the Lancair? >3. Is it really possible to fit an O-360 to the TR-1 and if so, what are the >CG implications? > >John > > >> From: Mark Kettering >> Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 21:47:04 -0400 (EDT) >> To: >> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >> >> >> Hi Scott, >> >> In many ways the RV 7 kits are the best kits in the world. Fantastic fit, >> instructions, factory support, third party support, options, resale value and >> much more. But they are not the best aircraft. They are little more than a >> kit of 1960's designs like the Grummans or others. Compared to a more modern >> composite aircraft they really are not all that good of performers. They tend >> to be slower (for a given engine and stall speed), have less useful load and >> even with being a great kit they still tend to cost a fair amount to finish >> and take a fair amount of time. Most of the RV 7s are over 1200 lbs empty >> weight! I think even your big engine IFR TR1 is well under 1000 lbs. Or was >> it well under 900 lbs? >> >> I know being part of the RV club has it's own draw but I think your plane is a >> much better choice. Yes there are problems with the TR1. But at least the >> wings tend to stay on. >> >> Mark >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Scott Stearns >>> Sent: Oct 26, 2010 4:00 PM >>> To: kis-list@matronics.com >>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>> >>> An RV fastbuild kit hands down. If you build the Cruiser then you'll have >>> that RV done in a year if you buy that fastbuild and FWF kits. >>> >>> The lancair is a great airplane, but the cost is much higher for the kit, the >>> engine, and the RG insurance will be a lot higher. It is fast, but the >>> landing speed is much higher too. Unless you do a lot of long range cross >>> country and don't plan on flying into any shorter strips, thenI don't think >>> you'll get a lot for the extra money. >>> >>> Also, a well built RV is pretty easy to sell. I kind of with I would have >>> built an RV. >>> >>> Scott >>> >>> --- On Mon, 10/25/10, John Petrie wrote: >>> >>> >>> From: John Petrie >>> Subject: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>> To: "KIS-List Digest Server" >>> Date: Monday, October 25, 2010, 9:08 PM >>> >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Its been 14 years since I received my KIS Cruiser kit and 10 years of >>> successful flying. However, the idea of the 4 seats being constantly filled >>> by my family appears to be more of a dream than a reality. As a result, I >>> have just sold my plane and am now looking for a 2 place kit which I can >>> enjoy with my one son who is also passionate about aircraft. So, I was hoping >>> someone on this list could give me some useful advice on which direction to >>> follow. >>> I am currently looking at either an RV7 or a Lancair 360. I really do like >>> the speed of the Lancair, but also the simplicity of the RV. >>> Does anyone have any other better suggestions and advice? >>> >>> Thanks in anticipation. >>> John >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 06:00:54 AM PST US From: Mark Kettering Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold Jason, I am also working to install an IO-360 in my TR1 but have just started. But I think maybe an IO-320 is more cost and time effective for the TR1. I have read that with similar modifications to the 320 that Scott has done to the 360 you should have about 195 hp. There is also a conversion for the 320 to make it a 340 but it is expensive. If you wanted to be faster than your friend's RV you could sell you 290 and get a 320 and add the mods. Mark -----Original Message----- >From: Jason Hills >Sent: Oct 27, 2010 1:46 AM >To: kis-list@matronics.com >Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold > >Scott/Mark, > >I'm not planning any major engine upgrades for my plane, at least not just yet... I just overhauled the engine 2 years ago. > >Current projects are getting the bugs out of the new engine monitor system (JPI EDM 740), improving engine cooling (problems found with the new engine monitor), then probably adding a TruTrak autopilot coupled to the 430W, and upgrading to a more efficient prop. Maybe after all of that if I need more speed I'll consider doing some upgrades to the engine.... > >For whoever asked, my plane is a taildragger, and I did add gear leg intersection fairings this past summer. We considered fairing the legs themselves, but decided it probably wasn't really worth the effort, at least for now. > >Of course I'm also building an RV-8 in my garage. Not because the KIS isn't a good plane, just because I want to build an RV. I do appreciate the short field performance, lower stall speed and higher aerobatic g-limits of the RV (compared to the KIS), and I really like the tandem design. Plus I didn't build my KIS, and I'm having a lot of fun building. Although I've learned a TON working on the TR-1c the past 5.5 years... having now pretty much redone the firewall forward and the panel. > >...Jason > > >On Oct 26, 2010, at 10:07 PM, Scott Stearns wrote: > >> Hi Jason, >> >> I can take on the third one as I have an IO-360 (parallel valve) in my TR-1. I put my battery behind the aft fuselage bulkhead to help with the CG and I have a taildragger. You can use you current wieght and balance and just add the wieght difference with the approximate moment arm of the engine. My CG is fine, I'd even like it to be a bit further forward, but my cowls are also carbon. >> >> I have the cowling originally intended for the IO-240 and I had to modify the lower cowl with the inlet from Van's. It just bearly fits widthwise. I have about 1/8 inch on each side at the closest point. Also you'll need an angle adaptor for the oil filter or it will hit the firewall. And I needed to make the air inlets larger and the cowl exit larger for cooling. >> >> It would be quite a project to convert to a 360, but it works. I still think you'd be better off modifying the 290 if it will respond to mods like the 360 does. >> >> Scott >> >> --- On Tue, 10/26/10, John Petrie wrote: >> >> From: John Petrie >> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >> To: kis-list@matronics.com >> Date: Tuesday, October 26, 2010, 7:53 PM >> >> >> Mark, >> >> You make a very good argument for the TR-1. I have a few questions though: >> 1. What do you mean by "...the wings tend to stay on"? >> 2. How does the cockpit size compare to the Lancair? >> 3. Is it really possible to fit an O-360 to the TR-1 and if so, what are the >> CG implications? >> >> John >> >> >> >> >> > From: Mark Kettering >> > Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 21:47:04 -0400 (EDT) >> > To: >> > Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >> > >> > >> > Hi Scott, >> > >> > In many ways the RV 7 kits are the best kits in the world. Fantastic fit, >> > instructions, factory support, third party support, options, resale value and >> > much more. But they are not the best aircraft. They are little more than a >> > kit of 1960's designs like the Grummans or others. Compared to a more modern >> > composite aircraft they really are not all that good of performers. They tend >> > to be slower (for a given engine and stall speed), have less useful load and >> > even with being a great kit they still tend to cost a fair amount to finish >> > and take a fair amount of time. Most of the RV 7s are over 1200 lbs empty >> > weight! I think even your big engine IFR TR1 is well under 1000 lbs. Or was >> > it well under 900 lbs? >> > >> > I know being part of the RV club has it's own draw but I think your plane is a >> > much better choice. Yes there are problems with the TR1. But at least the >> > wings tend to stay on. >> > >> > Mark >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> >> From: Scott Stearns >> >> Sent: Oct 26, 2010 4:00 PM >> >> To: kis-list@matronics.com >> >> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >> >> >> >> An RV fastbuild kit hands down. If you build the Cruiser then you'll have >> >> that RV done in a year if you buy that fastbuild and FWF kits. >> >> >> >> The lancair is a great airplane, but the cost is much higher for the kit, the >> >> engine, and the RG insurance will be a lot higher. It is fast, but the >> >> landing speed is much higher too. Unless you do a lot of long range cross >> >> country and don't plan on flying into any shorter strips, then I don't think >> >> you'll get a lot for the extra money. >> >> >> >> Also, a well built RV is pretty easy to sell. I kind of with I would have >> >> built an RV. >> >> >> >> Scott >> >> >> >> --- On Mon, 10/25/10, John Petrie wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> From: John Petrie >> >> Subject: KIS-List: KIS Sold >> >> To: "KIS-List Digest Server" >> >> Date: Monday, October 25, 2010, 9:08 PM >> >> >> >> >> >> Hi all, >> >> >> >> Its been 14 years since I received my KIS Cruiser kit and 10 years of >> >> successful flying. However, the idea of the 4 seats being constantly filled >> >> by my family appears to be more of a dream than a reality. As a result, I >> >> have just sold my plane and am now looking for a 2 place kit which I can >> >> enjoy with my one son who is also passionate about aircraft. So, I was hoping >> >> someone on this list could give me some useful advice on which direction to >> >> follow. >> >> I am currently looking at either an RV7 or a Lancair 360. I really do like >> >> the speed of the Lancair, but also the simplicity of the RV. >> >> Does anyone have any other better suggestions and advice? >> >> >> >> Thanks in anticipation. >> >> John >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >sp; --> http://forums.sp; - List Contribution Web Sbsp; -Matt Dralle, Listm/contribution" target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 09:01:29 AM PST US From: Jason Hills Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold I haven't been in a Lancair 360, but I think the 235 is almost the same plane. Somewhere between 235 and 360 they changed the tail to improve stall/spin characteristics, but I still would avoid stalls/spins in that family of planes... The cockpits are likely similar. Compared to the TR-1 the Lancair 235 reclines people more. I think that improves comfort for tall people. Width is snug like the TR-1. My biggest problem with my plane's cockpit is anyone over 6'1" or 2" just doesn't fit (half my friends who would like to go flying). They have to bend their head sideways. At 6' I have to be careful what headset I use or the band brushes the ceiling and transmits engine vibration to me. Annoying! My Zulu works great as long as I'm left seat (right seat is 1/2" worse to clear the transponder plate and fitting below the seat). ...Jason On Oct 27, 2010, at 5:48 AM, Mark Kettering wrote: > > Hi John, > > I think Scott answered 1 and 3. I do not know how large the Lancair cockpit is. I remember seeing a web page that listed cockpit widths sometime ago but do not remember where. Also width does not tell the whole story. You really need to go and sit in them yourself to try them out for size and shape. > > Mark > > > -----Original Message----- >> From: John Petrie >> Sent: Oct 26, 2010 10:53 PM >> To: kis-list@matronics.com >> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >> >> >> Mark, >> >> You make a very good argument for the TR-1. I have a few questions though: >> 1. What do you mean by "...the wings tend to stay on"? >> 2. How does the cockpit size compare to the Lancair? >> 3. Is it really possible to fit an O-360 to the TR-1 and if so, what are the >> CG implications? >> >> John >> >> >> >> >>> From: Mark Kettering >>> Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 21:47:04 -0400 (EDT) >>> To: >>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>> >>> >>> Hi Scott, >>> >>> In many ways the RV 7 kits are the best kits in the world. Fantastic fit, >>> instructions, factory support, third party support, options, resale value and >>> much more. But they are not the best aircraft. They are little more than a >>> kit of 1960's designs like the Grummans or others. Compared to a more modern >>> composite aircraft they really are not all that good of performers. They tend >>> to be slower (for a given engine and stall speed), have less useful load and >>> even with being a great kit they still tend to cost a fair amount to finish >>> and take a fair amount of time. Most of the RV 7s are over 1200 lbs empty >>> weight! I think even your big engine IFR TR1 is well under 1000 lbs. Or was >>> it well under 900 lbs? >>> >>> I know being part of the RV club has it's own draw but I think your plane is a >>> much better choice. Yes there are problems with the TR1. But at least the >>> wings tend to stay on. >>> >>> Mark >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Scott Stearns >>>> Sent: Oct 26, 2010 4:00 PM >>>> To: kis-list@matronics.com >>>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>>> >>>> An RV fastbuild kit hands down. If you build the Cruiser then you'll have >>>> that RV done in a year if you buy that fastbuild and FWF kits. >>>> >>>> The lancair is a great airplane, but the cost is much higher for the kit, the >>>> engine, and the RG insurance will be a lot higher. It is fast, but the >>>> landing speed is much higher too. Unless you do a lot of long range cross >>>> country and don't plan on flying into any shorter strips, then I don't think >>>> you'll get a lot for the extra money. >>>> >>>> Also, a well built RV is pretty easy to sell. I kind of with I would have >>>> built an RV. >>>> >>>> Scott >>>> >>>> --- On Mon, 10/25/10, John Petrie wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> From: John Petrie >>>> Subject: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>>> To: "KIS-List Digest Server" >>>> Date: Monday, October 25, 2010, 9:08 PM >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> Its been 14 years since I received my KIS Cruiser kit and 10 years of >>>> successful flying. However, the idea of the 4 seats being constantly filled >>>> by my family appears to be more of a dream than a reality. As a result, I >>>> have just sold my plane and am now looking for a 2 place kit which I can >>>> enjoy with my one son who is also passionate about aircraft. So, I was hoping >>>> someone on this list could give me some useful advice on which direction to >>>> follow. >>>> I am currently looking at either an RV7 or a Lancair 360. I really do like >>>> the speed of the Lancair, but also the simplicity of the RV. >>>> Does anyone have any other better suggestions and advice? >>>> >>>> Thanks in anticipation. >>>> John >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 09:11:15 AM PST US From: Jason Hills Subject: KIS-List: Re: KIS TR-1C Autopilot OC, What issues has your hanger partner had with the TruTrak? I know one RV-10 where there were some initial issues with the trim that caused some unsafe pitch excursions, but everyone I know loves theirs (including the RV-10 owner). Worth checking out other options too of course. I won't be doing that upgrade until next fall or winter most likely. ...Jason On Oct 27, 2010, at 4:27 AM, wrote: > 10/27/2010 > > Hello Jason, You wrote: "....then probably adding a TruTrak autopilot coupled to the 430W..." > > I know that Tru Trak is the big bear in the autopilot market, but before you go that way please take a close look at the Trio Avionics products: > > http://www.trioavionics.com/ > > My hangar partner has a Tru Trak autopilot in his RV-7 and he was not completely satisfied with it so I put an EZ Pilot control head in my KIS TR-1 coupled to my GNS 430W. I used their wiring harness adapter and my already installed Navaid AP 1 servo. It works great and I am very satisfied with it. > > 'OC' Baker Says: "The best investment we can make is the time and effort to gather and understand knowledge." > > ========================================================== > > Scott/Mark, > > I'm not planning any major engine upgrades for my plane, at least not just yet... I just overhauled the engine 2 years ago. > > Current projects are getting the bugs out of the new engine monitor system (JPI EDM 740), improving engine cooling (problems found with the new engine monitor), then probably adding a TruTrak autopilot coupled to the 430W, and upgrading to a more efficient prop. Maybe after all of that if I need more speed I'll consider doing some upgrades to the engine.... > > For whoever asked, my plane is a taildragger, and I did add gear leg intersection fairings this past summer. We considered fairing the legs themselves, but decided it probably wasn't really worth the effort, at least for now. > > Of course I'm also building an RV-8 in my garage. Not because the KIS isn't a good plane, just because I want to build an RV. I do appreciate the short field performance, lower stall speed and higher aerobatic g-limits of the RV (compared to the KIS), and I really like the tandem design. Plus I didn't build my KIS, and I'm having a lot of fun building. Although I've learned a TON working on the TR-1c the past 5.5 years... having now pretty much redone the firewall forward and the panel. > > ...Jason > > > > > ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 10:10:21 AM PST US From: Richard Trickel Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold Jason I am 6-2 and have no trouble.- I am not sure but do=B4t you have Kirby je ffersons plane.- If so I know his seate were really fay-> I did the tes t flight and was scrunched pretty bad.- I would redo the seats.- Follow the manual and thind down the cushions.- when proper the back seat botto n is almost none existant.. Rich --- On Wed, 10/27/10, Jason Hills wrote: From: Jason Hills Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold I haven't been in a Lancair 360, but I think the 235 is almost the same pla ne. Somewhere between 235 and 360 they changed the tail to improve stall/sp in characteristics, but I still would avoid stalls/spins in that family of planes... The cockpits are likely similar. Compared to the TR-1 the Lancair 235 recli nes people more. I think that improves comfort for tall people. Width is sn ug like the TR-1. My biggest problem with my plane's cockpit is anyone over 6'1" or 2" just d oesn't fit (half my friends who would like to go flying). They have to bend their head sideways. At 6' I have to be careful what headset I use or the band brushes the ceiling and transmits engine vibration to me. Annoying! My Zulu works great as long as I'm left seat (right seat is 1/2" worse to cle ar the transponder plate and fitting below the seat). ...Jason On Oct 27, 2010, at 5:48 AM, Mark Kettering wrote: > > Hi John, > > I think Scott answered 1 and 3.- I do not know how large the Lancair co ckpit is.- I remember seeing a web page that listed cockpit widths someti me ago but do not remember where.- Also width does not tell the whole sto ry.- You really need to go and sit in them yourself to try them out for s ize and shape. > > Mark > > > -----Original Message----- >> From: John Petrie >> Sent: Oct 26, 2010 10:53 PM >> To: kis-list@matronics.com >> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >> >> >> Mark, >> >> You make a very good argument for the TR-1. I have a few questions thoug h: >> 1. What do you mean by "...the wings tend to stay on"? >> 2. How does the cockpit size compare to the Lancair? >> 3. Is it really possible to fit an O-360 to the TR-1 and if so, what are the >> CG implications? >> >> John >> >> >> >> >>> From: Mark Kettering >>> Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 21:47:04 -0400 (EDT) >>> To: >>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>> >>> >>> Hi Scott, >>> >>> In many ways the RV 7 kits are the best kits in the world.- Fantastic fit, >>> instructions, factory support, third party support, options, resale val ue and >>> much more.- But they are not the best aircraft. They are little more than a >>> kit of 1960's designs like the Grummans or others.- Compared to a mor e modern >>> composite aircraft they really are not all that good of performers.- They tend >>> to be slower (for a given engine and stall speed), have less useful loa d and >>> even with being a great kit they still tend to cost a fair amount to fi nish >>> and take a fair amount of time.- Most of the RV 7s are over 1200 lbs empty >>> weight!- I think even your big engine IFR TR1 is well under 1000 lbs. - Or was >>> it well under 900 lbs? >>> >>> I know being part of the RV club has it's own draw but I think your pla ne is a >>> much better choice.- Yes there are problems with the TR1.- But at l east the >>> wings tend to stay on. >>> >>> Mark >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Scott Stearns >>>> Sent: Oct 26, 2010 4:00 PM >>>> To: kis-list@matronics.com >>>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>>> >>>> An RV fastbuild kit hands down.- If you build the Cruiser then you'l l have >>>> that RV done in a year if you buy that fastbuild and FWF kits. >>>>- >>>> The lancair is a great airplane, but the cost is much higher for the k it, the >>>> engine, and the RG insurance will be a lot higher.- It is fast, but the >>>> landing speed is much higher too.- Unless you do a lot of long range cross >>>> country and don't plan on flying into any shorter strips, then I don't think >>>> you'll get a lot for the extra money. >>>>- >>>> Also, a well built RV is pretty easy to sell.- I kind of with I woul d have >>>> built an RV.- >>>>- >>>> Scott >>>> >>>> --- On Mon, 10/25/10, John Petrie wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> From: John Petrie >>>> Subject: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>>> To: "KIS-List Digest Server" >>>> Date: Monday, October 25, 2010, 9:08 PM >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> It=B9s been 14 years since I received my KIS Cruiser kit and 10 years of >>>> successful flying. However, the idea of the 4 seats being constantly f illed >>>> by my family appears to be more of a dream than a reality. As a result , I >>>> have just sold my plane and am now looking for a 2 place kit which I c an >>>> enjoy with my one son who is also passionate about aircraft. So, I was hoping >>>> someone on this list could give me some useful advice on which directi on to >>>> follow. >>>> I am currently looking at either an RV7 or a Lancair 360. I really do like >>>> the speed of the Lancair, but also the simplicity of the RV. >>>> Does anyone have any other better suggestions and advice? >>>> >>>> Thanks in anticipation. >>>> John >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > le, List Admin. =0A=0A=0A ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 10:11:09 AM PST US From: Richard Trickel Subject: Re: KIS-List: Re: KIS TR-1C Autopilot Jason By the way I like the trio also.- The price is good and they work great. Rich --- On Wed, 10/27/10, Jason Hills wrote: From: Jason Hills Subject: KIS-List: Re: KIS TR-1C Autopilot OC, What issues has your hanger partner had with the TruTrak? I know one RV-10 where there were some initial issues with the trim that ca used some unsafe pitch excursions, but everyone I know loves theirs (includ ing the RV-10 owner). Worth checking out other options too of course. I won 't be doing that upgrade until next fall or winter most likely. ...Jason On Oct 27, 2010, at 4:27 AM, wrote: > 10/27/2010 > > Hello Jason, You wrote: "....then probably adding a TruTrak autopilot cou pled to the 430W..." > > I know that Tru Trak is the big bear in the autopilot market, but before you go that way please take a close look at the Trio Avionics products: > > http://www.trioavionics.com/ > > My hangar partner has a Tru Trak autopilot in his RV-7 and he was not com pletely satisfied with it so I put an EZ Pilot control head in my KIS TR-1 coupled to my GNS 430W. I used their wiring harness adapter and my already installed Navaid AP 1 servo. It works great and I am very satisfied with it .. > > 'OC' Baker Says: "The best investment we can make is the time and effort to gather and understand knowledge." > > ======================== ========= > > Scott/Mark, > > I'm not planning any major engine upgrades for my plane, at least not jus t yet... I just overhauled the engine 2 years ago. > > Current projects are getting the bugs out of the new engine monitor syste m (JPI EDM 740), improving engine cooling (problems found with the new engi ne monitor), then probably adding a TruTrak autopilot coupled to the 430W, and upgrading to a more efficient prop. Maybe after all of that if I need m ore speed I'll consider doing some upgrades to the engine.... > > For whoever asked, my plane is a taildragger, and I did add gear leg inte rsection fairings this past summer. We considered fairing the legs themselv es, but decided it probably wasn't really worth the effort, at least for no w. > > Of course I'm also building an RV-8 in my garage. Not because the KIS isn 't a good plane, just because I want to build an RV. I do appreciate the sh ort field performance, lower stall speed and higher aerobatic g-limits of t he RV (compared to the KIS), and I really like the tandem design. Plus I di dn't build my KIS, and I'm having a lot of fun building. Although I've lear ned a TON working on the TR-1c the past 5.5 years... having now pretty much redone the firewall forward and the panel. > > ...Jason > > > > > le, List Admin. =0A=0A=0A ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 12:04:19 PM PST US From: jason@hills.org Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold My plane was Richard Warden's tail-dragger (serial number 51 I believe), but the seats are fairly thick. Worth looking into! Thanks. ...Jason Oct 27, 2010 10:13:41 AM, kis-list@matronics.com wrote: ========================================== JasonI am 6-2 and have no trouble. I am not sure but dot you have Kirby jeffersons plane. If so I know his seate were really fay > I did the test flight and was scrunched pretty bad. I would redo the seats. Follow the manual and thind down the cushions. when proper the back seat botton is almost none existant.. Rich --- On Wed, 10/27/10, Jason Hills wrote: From: Jason Hills Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold I haven't been in a Lancair 360, but I think the 235 is almost the same plane. Somewhere between 235 and 360 they changed the tail to improve stall/spin characteristics, but I still would avoid stalls/spins in that family of planes... The cockpits are likely similar. Compared to the TR-1 the Lancair 235 reclines people more. I think that improves comfort for tall people. Width is snug like the TR-1. My biggest problem with my plane's cockpit is anyone over 6'1" or 2" just doesn't fit (half my friends who would like to go flying). They have to bend their head sideways. At 6' I have to be careful what headset I use or the band brushes the ceiling and transmits engine vibration to me. Annoying! My Zulu works great as long as I'm left seat (right seat is 1/2" worse to clear the transponder plate and fitting below the seat). ...Jason On Oct 27, 2010, at 5:48 AM, Mark Kettering wrote: > > Hi John, > > I think Scott answered 1 and 3. I do not know how large the Lancair cockpit is. I remember seeing a web page that listed cockpit widths sometime ago but do not remember where. Also width does not tell the whole story. You really need to go and sit in them yourself to try them out for size and shape. > > Mark > > > -----Original Message----- >> From: John Petrie >> Sent: Oct 26, 2010 10:53 PM >> To: kis-list@matronics.com >> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >> >> >> Mark, >> >> You make a very good argument for the TR-1. I have a few questions though: >> 1. What do you mean by "...the wings tend to stay on"? >> 2. How does the cockpit size compare to the Lancair? >> 3. Is it really possible to fit an O-360 to the TR-1 and if so, what are the >> CG implications? >> >> John >> >> >> >> >>> From: Mark Kettering >>> Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 21:47:04 -0400 (EDT) >>> To: >>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>> >>> >>> Hi Scott, >>> >>> In many ways the RV 7 kits are the best kits in the world. Fantastic fit, >>> instructions, factory support, third party support, options, resale value and >>> much more. But they are not the best aircraft. They are little more than a >>> kit of 1960's designs like the Grummans or others. Compared to a more modern >>> composite aircraft they really are not all that good of performers. They tend >>> to be slower (for a given engine and stall speed), have less useful load and >>> even with being a great kit they still tend to cost a fair amount to finish >>> and take a fair amount of time. Most of the RV 7s are over 1200 lbs empty >>> weight! I think even your big engine IFR TR1 is well under 1000 lbs. Or was >>> it well under 900 lbs? >>> >>> I know being part of the RV club has it's own draw but I think your plane is a >>> much better choice. Yes there are problems with the TR1. But at least the >>> wings tend to stay on. >>> >>> Mark >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Scott Stearns >>>> Sent: Oct 26, 2010 4:00 PM >>>> To: kis-list@matronics.com >>>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>>> >>>> An RV fastbuild kit hands down. If you build the Cruiser then you'll have >>>> that RV done in a year if you buy that fastbuild and FWF kits. >>>> >>>> The lancair is a great airplane, but the cost is much higher for the kit, the >>>> engine, and the RG insurance will be a lot higher. It is fast, but the >>>> landing speed is much higher too. Unless you do a lot of long range cross >>>> country and don't plan on flying into any shorter strips, then I don't think >>>> you'll get a lot for the extra money. >>>> >>>> Also, a well built RV is pretty easy to sell. I kind of with I would have >>>> built an RV. >>>> >>>> Scott >>>> >>>> --- On Mon, 10/25/10, John Petrie wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> From: John Petrie >>>> Subject: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>>> To: "KIS-List Digest Server" >>>> Date: Monday, October 25, 2010, 9:08 PM >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> Its been 14 years since I received my KIS Cruiser kit and 10 years of >>>> successful flying. However, the idea of the 4 seats being constantly filled >>>> by my family appears to be more of a dream than a reality. As a result, I >>>> have just sold my plane and am now looking for a 2 place kit which I can >>>> enjoy with my one son who is also passionate about aircraft. So, I was hoping >>>> someone on this list could give me some useful advice on which direction to >>>> follow. >>>> I am currently looking at either an RV7 or a Lancair 360. I really do like >>>> the speed of the Lancair, but also the simplicity of the RV. >>>> Does anyone have any other better suggestions and advice? >>>> >>>> Thanks in anticipation. >>>> John >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >&ghref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?KIS-List" target=_blank>http:/ - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS; -Matt Dralle, List Admin========= ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 12:40:06 PM PST US From: Richard Trickel Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold Jason Yea that was built mostly by chuck and Dick was fairly short so they put th ick seats in that also.- I think I also flew that plane.- Is it still Y ellow or did you paint it. RICH --- On Wed, 10/27/10, jason@hills.org wrote: From: jason@hills.org Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold My plane was Richard Warden's tail-dragger (serial number 51 I believe), bu t the seats are fairly thick. Worth looking into! Thanks. ...Jason Oct 27, 2010 10:13:41 AM, kis-list@matronics.com wrote: ================= JasonI am 6-2 and have no trouble.- I am not sure but do=B4t you have Kir by jeffersons plane.- If so I know his seate were really fay > I did the test flight and was scrunched pretty bad.- I would redo the seats.- Fol low the manual and thind down the cushions.- when proper the back seat bo tton is almost none existant.. Rich --- On Wed, 10/27/10, Jason Hills- wrote: From: Jason Hills Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold I haven't been in a Lancair 360, but I think the 235 is almost the same pla ne. Somewhere between 235 and 360 they changed the tail to improve stall/sp in characteristics, but I still would avoid stalls/spins in that family of planes... The cockpits are likely similar. Compared to the TR-1 the Lancair 235 recli nes people more. I think that improves comfort for tall people. Width is sn ug like the TR-1. My biggest problem with my plane's cockpit is anyone over 6'1" or 2" just d oesn't fit (half my friends who would like to go flying). They have to bend their head sideways. At 6' I have to be careful what headset I use or the band brushes the ceiling and transmits engine vibration to me. Annoying! My Zulu works great as long as I'm left seat (right seat is 1/2" worse to cle ar the transponder plate and fitting below the seat). ...Jason On Oct 27, 2010, at 5:48 AM, Mark Kettering- wrote: > > Hi John, > > I think Scott answered 1 and 3.- I do not know how large the Lancair co ckpit is.- I remember seeing a web page that listed cockpit widths someti me ago but do not remember where.- Also width does not tell the whole sto ry.- You really need to go and sit in them yourself to try them out for s ize and shape. > > Mark > > > -----Original Message----- >> From: John Petrie >> Sent: Oct 26, 2010 10:53 PM >> To: kis-list@matronics.com >> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >> >> >> Mark, >> >> You make a very good argument for the TR-1. I have a few questions thoug h: >> 1. What do you mean by "...the wings tend to stay on"? >> 2. How does the cockpit size compare to the Lancair? >> 3. Is it really possible to fit an O-360 to the TR-1 and if so, what are the >> CG implications? >> >> John >> >> >> >> >>> From: Mark Kettering >>> Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 21:47:04 -0400 (EDT) >>> To: >>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>> >>> >>> Hi Scott, >>> >>> In many ways the RV 7 kits are the best kits in the world.- Fantastic fit, >>> instructions, factory support, third party support, options, resale val ue and >>> much more.- But they are not the best aircraft. They are little more than a >>> kit of 1960's designs like the Grummans or others.- Compared to a mor e modern >>> composite aircraft they really are not all that good of performers.- They tend >>> to be slower (for a given engine and stall speed), have less useful loa d and >>> even with being a great kit they still tend to cost a fair amount to fi nish >>> and take a fair amount of time.- Most of the RV 7s are over 1200 lbs empty >>> weight!- I think even your big engine IFR TR1 is well under 1000 lbs. - Or was >>> it well under 900 lbs? >>> >>> I know being part of the RV club has it's own draw but I think your pla ne is a >>> much better choice.- Yes there are problems with the TR1.- But at l east the >>> wings tend to stay on. >>> >>> Mark >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Scott Stearns >>>> Sent: Oct 26, 2010 4:00 PM >>>> To: kis-list@matronics.com >>>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>>> >>>> An RV fastbuild kit hands down.- If you build the Cruiser then you'l l have >>>> that RV done in a year if you buy that fastbuild and FWF kits. >>>>- >>>> The lancair is a great airplane, but the cost is much higher for the k it, the >>>> engine, and the RG insurance will be a lot higher.- It is fast, but the >>>> landing speed is much higher too.- Unless you do a lot of long range cross >>>> country and don't plan on flying into any shorter strips, then I don't think >>>> you'll get a lot for the extra money. >>>>- >>>> Also, a well built RV is pretty easy to sell.- I kind of with I woul d have >>>> built an RV.- >>>>- >>>> Scott >>>> >>>> --- On Mon, 10/25/10, John Petrie- wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> From: John Petrie >>>> Subject: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>>> To: "KIS-List Digest Server" >>>> Date: Monday, October 25, 2010, 9:08 PM >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> It=B9s been 14 years since I received my KIS Cruiser kit and 10 years of >>>> successful flying. However, the idea of the 4 seats being constantly f illed >>>> by my family appears to be more of a dream than a reality. As a result , I >>>> have just sold my plane and am now looking for a 2 place kit which I c an >>>> enjoy with my one son who is also passionate about aircraft. So, I was hoping >>>> someone on this list could give me some useful advice on which directi on to >>>> follow. >>>> I am currently looking at either an RV7 or a Lancair 360. I really do like >>>> the speed of the Lancair, but also the simplicity of the RV. >>>> Does anyone have any other better suggestions and advice? >>>> >>>> Thanks in anticipation. >>>> John >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >&ghref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?KIS-List" target=_blank>htt p:/ - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS;- - - - - - ----Matt Dralle, L ist Admin========= le, List Admin. =0A=0A=0A ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 02:01:32 PM PST US From: "F. Tim Yoder" Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold Be sure to use Temper Foam. I used 1" blue and 1" pink to get my seat as low as possible and it is the best seat I ride in! Tim ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 12:02 PM Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold > > My plane was Richard Warden's tail-dragger (serial number 51 I believe), > but the seats are fairly thick. Worth looking into! Thanks. > > ...Jason > > > Oct 27, 2010 10:13:41 AM, kis-list@matronics.com wrote: > > ========================================== > > > JasonI am 6-2 and have no trouble. I am not sure but dot you have Kirby > jeffersons plane. If so I know his seate were really fay > I did the test > flight and was scrunched pretty bad. I would redo the seats. Follow the > manual and thind down the cushions. when proper the back seat botton is > almost none existant.. Rich > > --- On Wed, 10/27/10, Jason Hills wrote: > > From: Jason Hills > Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold > To: "kis-list@matronics.com" > Date: Wednesday, October 27, 2010, 3:57 PM > > > I haven't been in a Lancair 360, but I think the 235 is almost the same > plane. Somewhere between 235 and 360 they changed the tail to improve > stall/spin characteristics, but I still would avoid stalls/spins in that > family of planes... > > The cockpits are likely similar. Compared to the TR-1 the Lancair 235 > reclines people more. I think that improves comfort for tall people. Width > is snug like the TR-1. > > My biggest problem with my plane's cockpit is anyone over 6'1" or 2" just > doesn't fit (half my friends who would like to go flying). They have to > bend their head sideways. At 6' I have to be careful what headset I use or > the band brushes the ceiling and transmits engine vibration to me. > Annoying! My Zulu works great as long as I'm left seat (right seat is 1/2" > worse to clear the transponder plate and fitting below the seat). > > ...Jason > > > On Oct 27, 2010, at 5:48 AM, Mark Kettering wrote: > >> >> Hi John, >> >> I think Scott answered 1 and 3. I do not know how large the Lancair >> cockpit is. I remember seeing a web page that listed cockpit widths >> sometime ago but do not remember where. Also width does not tell the >> whole story. You really need to go and sit in them yourself to try them >> out for size and shape. >> >> Mark >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >>> From: John Petrie >>> Sent: Oct 26, 2010 10:53 PM >>> To: kis-list@matronics.com >>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>> >>> >>> Mark, >>> >>> You make a very good argument for the TR-1. I have a few questions >>> though: >>> 1. What do you mean by "...the wings tend to stay on"? >>> 2. How does the cockpit size compare to the Lancair? >>> 3. Is it really possible to fit an O-360 to the TR-1 and if so, what are >>> the >>> CG implications? >>> >>> John >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> From: Mark Kettering >>>> Reply-To: >>>> Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 21:47:04 -0400 (EDT) >>>> To: >>>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi Scott, >>>> >>>> In many ways the RV 7 kits are the best kits in the world. Fantastic >>>> fit, >>>> instructions, factory support, third party support, options, resale >>>> value and >>>> much more. But they are not the best aircraft. They are little more >>>> than a >>>> kit of 1960's designs like the Grummans or others. Compared to a more >>>> modern >>>> composite aircraft they really are not all that good of performers. >>>> They tend >>>> to be slower (for a given engine and stall speed), have less useful >>>> load and >>>> even with being a great kit they still tend to cost a fair amount to >>>> finish >>>> and take a fair amount of time. Most of the RV 7s are over 1200 lbs >>>> empty >>>> weight! I think even your big engine IFR TR1 is well under 1000 lbs. >>>> Or was >>>> it well under 900 lbs? >>>> >>>> I know being part of the RV club has it's own draw but I think your >>>> plane is a >>>> much better choice. Yes there are problems with the TR1. But at least >>>> the >>>> wings tend to stay on. >>>> >>>> Mark >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Scott Stearns >>>>> Sent: Oct 26, 2010 4:00 PM >>>>> To: kis-list@matronics.com >>>>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>>>> >>>>> An RV fastbuild kit hands down. If you build the Cruiser then you'll >>>>> have >>>>> that RV done in a year if you buy that fastbuild and FWF kits. >>>>> >>>>> The lancair is a great airplane, but the cost is much higher for the >>>>> kit, the >>>>> engine, and the RG insurance will be a lot higher. It is fast, but >>>>> the >>>>> landing speed is much higher too. Unless you do a lot of long range >>>>> cross >>>>> country and don't plan on flying into any shorter strips, then I don't >>>>> think >>>>> you'll get a lot for the extra money. >>>>> >>>>> Also, a well built RV is pretty easy to sell. I kind of with I would >>>>> have >>>>> built an RV. >>>>> >>>>> Scott >>>>> >>>>> --- On Mon, 10/25/10, John Petrie wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> From: John Petrie >>>>> Subject: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>>>> To: "KIS-List Digest Server" >>>>> Date: Monday, October 25, 2010, 9:08 PM >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> Its been 14 years since I received my KIS Cruiser kit and 10 years of >>>>> successful flying. However, the idea of the 4 seats being constantly >>>>> filled >>>>> by my family appears to be more of a dream than a reality. As a >>>>> result, I >>>>> have just sold my plane and am now looking for a 2 place kit which I >>>>> can >>>>> enjoy with my one son who is also passionate about aircraft. So, I was >>>>> hoping >>>>> someone on this list could give me some useful advice on which >>>>> direction to >>>>> follow. >>>>> I am currently looking at either an RV7 or a Lancair 360. I really do >>>>> like >>>>> the speed of the Lancair, but also the simplicity of the RV. >>>>> Does anyone have any other better suggestions and advice? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks in anticipation. >>>>> John >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>&ghref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?KIS-List" >>target=_blank>http:/ - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS; -Matt Dralle, >>List Admin========= > > > ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 02:23:15 PM PST US Subject: KIS-List: KIS2 Seat issue...absorb shock on impact From: "Conners, Jerry L" There is literature available that provides options for a seat 'cushion' to absorb energy in the event of a crash...'a little goes a long way'...to minimize spinal injuries. I do not have a link for this info...but locatable with some effort. Yes, it does nil for the forward force, but significant for the 'downward' force during a 'controlled' crash. I remove the cushions and add a thin gel pad...I forget the product name but many options on line. Using a parachute requires selecting the correct chute to optimizing the seating/headroom restraints of the KIS2. Jer -----Original Message----- From: owner-kis-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kis-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of F. Tim Yoder Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 1:59 PM Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold Be sure to use Temper Foam. I used 1" blue and 1" pink to get my seat as low as possible and it is the best seat I ride in! Tim ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 12:02 PM Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold > > My plane was Richard Warden's tail-dragger (serial number 51 I believe), > but the seats are fairly thick. Worth looking into! Thanks. > > ...Jason > > > Oct 27, 2010 10:13:41 AM, kis-list@matronics.com wrote: > > ========================================== > > > JasonI am 6-2 and have no trouble. I am not sure but dot you have Kirby > jeffersons plane. If so I know his seate were really fay > I did the test > flight and was scrunched pretty bad. I would redo the seats. Follow the > manual and thind down the cushions. when proper the back seat botton is > almost none existant.. Rich > > --- On Wed, 10/27/10, Jason Hills wrote: > > From: Jason Hills > Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold > To: "kis-list@matronics.com" > Date: Wednesday, October 27, 2010, 3:57 PM > > > I haven't been in a Lancair 360, but I think the 235 is almost the same > plane. Somewhere between 235 and 360 they changed the tail to improve > stall/spin characteristics, but I still would avoid stalls/spins in that > family of planes... > > The cockpits are likely similar. Compared to the TR-1 the Lancair 235 > reclines people more. I think that improves comfort for tall people. Width > is snug like the TR-1. > > My biggest problem with my plane's cockpit is anyone over 6'1" or 2" just > doesn't fit (half my friends who would like to go flying). They have to > bend their head sideways. At 6' I have to be careful what headset I use or > the band brushes the ceiling and transmits engine vibration to me. > Annoying! My Zulu works great as long as I'm left seat (right seat is 1/2" > worse to clear the transponder plate and fitting below the seat). > > ...Jason > > > On Oct 27, 2010, at 5:48 AM, Mark Kettering wrote: > >> >> Hi John, >> >> I think Scott answered 1 and 3. I do not know how large the Lancair >> cockpit is. I remember seeing a web page that listed cockpit widths >> sometime ago but do not remember where. Also width does not tell the >> whole story. You really need to go and sit in them yourself to try them >> out for size and shape. >> >> Mark >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >>> From: John Petrie >>> Sent: Oct 26, 2010 10:53 PM >>> To: kis-list@matronics.com >>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>> >>> >>> Mark, >>> >>> You make a very good argument for the TR-1. I have a few questions >>> though: >>> 1. What do you mean by "...the wings tend to stay on"? >>> 2. How does the cockpit size compare to the Lancair? >>> 3. Is it really possible to fit an O-360 to the TR-1 and if so, what are >>> the >>> CG implications? >>> >>> John >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> From: Mark Kettering >>>> Reply-To: >>>> Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 21:47:04 -0400 (EDT) >>>> To: >>>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi Scott, >>>> >>>> In many ways the RV 7 kits are the best kits in the world. Fantastic >>>> fit, >>>> instructions, factory support, third party support, options, resale >>>> value and >>>> much more. But they are not the best aircraft. They are little more >>>> than a >>>> kit of 1960's designs like the Grummans or others. Compared to a more >>>> modern >>>> composite aircraft they really are not all that good of performers. >>>> They tend >>>> to be slower (for a given engine and stall speed), have less useful >>>> load and >>>> even with being a great kit they still tend to cost a fair amount to >>>> finish >>>> and take a fair amount of time. Most of the RV 7s are over 1200 lbs >>>> empty >>>> weight! I think even your big engine IFR TR1 is well under 1000 lbs. >>>> Or was >>>> it well under 900 lbs? >>>> >>>> I know being part of the RV club has it's own draw but I think your >>>> plane is a >>>> much better choice. Yes there are problems with the TR1. But at least >>>> the >>>> wings tend to stay on. >>>> >>>> Mark >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Scott Stearns >>>>> Sent: Oct 26, 2010 4:00 PM >>>>> To: kis-list@matronics.com >>>>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>>>> >>>>> An RV fastbuild kit hands down. If you build the Cruiser then you'll >>>>> have >>>>> that RV done in a year if you buy that fastbuild and FWF kits. >>>>> >>>>> The lancair is a great airplane, but the cost is much higher for the >>>>> kit, the >>>>> engine, and the RG insurance will be a lot higher. It is fast, but >>>>> the >>>>> landing speed is much higher too. Unless you do a lot of long range >>>>> cross >>>>> country and don't plan on flying into any shorter strips, then I don't >>>>> think >>>>> you'll get a lot for the extra money. >>>>> >>>>> Also, a well built RV is pretty easy to sell. I kind of with I would >>>>> have >>>>> built an RV. >>>>> >>>>> Scott >>>>> >>>>> --- On Mon, 10/25/10, John Petrie wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> From: John Petrie >>>>> Subject: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>>>> To: "KIS-List Digest Server" >>>>> Date: Monday, October 25, 2010, 9:08 PM >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> Its been 14 years since I received my KIS Cruiser kit and 10 years of >>>>> successful flying. However, the idea of the 4 seats being constantly >>>>> filled >>>>> by my family appears to be more of a dream than a reality. As a >>>>> result, I >>>>> have just sold my plane and am now looking for a 2 place kit which I >>>>> can >>>>> enjoy with my one son who is also passionate about aircraft. So, I was >>>>> hoping >>>>> someone on this list could give me some useful advice on which >>>>> direction to >>>>> follow. >>>>> I am currently looking at either an RV7 or a Lancair 360. I really do >>>>> like >>>>> the speed of the Lancair, but also the simplicity of the RV. >>>>> Does anyone have any other better suggestions and advice? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks in anticipation. >>>>> John >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>&ghref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?KIS-List" >>target=_blank>http:/ - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS; -Matt Dralle, >>List Admin========= > > > This communication, including any attachments, may contain confidential information and is intended only for the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. Any review, dissemination or copying of this communication by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and delete all copies of the original message. ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 02:35:45 PM PST US Subject: RE: KIS-List: KIS2 Seat issue...absorb shock on impact From: "Conners, Jerry L" http://www.backbenimble.com/gseat-mobility-gel-cushion.htm ... I use something similar to this when I remove the cushions to get the needed 'clearance/headroom'. Jer -----Original Message----- From: owner-kis-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kis-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Conners, Jerry L Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 2:21 PM Subject: KIS-List: KIS2 Seat issue...absorb shock on impact There is literature available that provides options for a seat 'cushion' to absorb energy in the event of a crash...'a little goes a long way'...to minimize spinal injuries. I do not have a link for this info...but locatable with some effort. Yes, it does nil for the forward force, but significant for the 'downward' force during a 'controlled' crash. I remove the cushions and add a thin gel pad...I forget the product name but many options on line. Using a parachute requires selecting the correct chute to optimizing the seating/headroom restraints of the KIS2. Jer -----Original Message----- From: owner-kis-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kis-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of F. Tim Yoder Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 1:59 PM Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold Be sure to use Temper Foam. I used 1" blue and 1" pink to get my seat as low as possible and it is the best seat I ride in! Tim ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 12:02 PM Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold > > My plane was Richard Warden's tail-dragger (serial number 51 I believe), > but the seats are fairly thick. Worth looking into! Thanks. > > ...Jason > > > Oct 27, 2010 10:13:41 AM, kis-list@matronics.com wrote: > > ========================================== > > > JasonI am 6-2 and have no trouble. I am not sure but dot you have Kirby > jeffersons plane. If so I know his seate were really fay > I did the test > flight and was scrunched pretty bad. I would redo the seats. Follow the > manual and thind down the cushions. when proper the back seat botton is > almost none existant.. Rich > > --- On Wed, 10/27/10, Jason Hills wrote: > > From: Jason Hills > Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold > To: "kis-list@matronics.com" > Date: Wednesday, October 27, 2010, 3:57 PM > > > I haven't been in a Lancair 360, but I think the 235 is almost the same > plane. Somewhere between 235 and 360 they changed the tail to improve > stall/spin characteristics, but I still would avoid stalls/spins in that > family of planes... > > The cockpits are likely similar. Compared to the TR-1 the Lancair 235 > reclines people more. I think that improves comfort for tall people. Width > is snug like the TR-1. > > My biggest problem with my plane's cockpit is anyone over 6'1" or 2" just > doesn't fit (half my friends who would like to go flying). They have to > bend their head sideways. At 6' I have to be careful what headset I use or > the band brushes the ceiling and transmits engine vibration to me. > Annoying! My Zulu works great as long as I'm left seat (right seat is 1/2" > worse to clear the transponder plate and fitting below the seat). > > ...Jason > > > On Oct 27, 2010, at 5:48 AM, Mark Kettering wrote: > >> >> Hi John, >> >> I think Scott answered 1 and 3. I do not know how large the Lancair >> cockpit is. I remember seeing a web page that listed cockpit widths >> sometime ago but do not remember where. Also width does not tell the >> whole story. You really need to go and sit in them yourself to try them >> out for size and shape. >> >> Mark >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >>> From: John Petrie >>> Sent: Oct 26, 2010 10:53 PM >>> To: kis-list@matronics.com >>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>> >>> >>> Mark, >>> >>> You make a very good argument for the TR-1. I have a few questions >>> though: >>> 1. What do you mean by "...the wings tend to stay on"? >>> 2. How does the cockpit size compare to the Lancair? >>> 3. Is it really possible to fit an O-360 to the TR-1 and if so, what are >>> the >>> CG implications? >>> >>> John >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> From: Mark Kettering >>>> Reply-To: >>>> Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 21:47:04 -0400 (EDT) >>>> To: >>>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi Scott, >>>> >>>> In many ways the RV 7 kits are the best kits in the world. Fantastic >>>> fit, >>>> instructions, factory support, third party support, options, resale >>>> value and >>>> much more. But they are not the best aircraft. They are little more >>>> than a >>>> kit of 1960's designs like the Grummans or others. Compared to a more >>>> modern >>>> composite aircraft they really are not all that good of performers. >>>> They tend >>>> to be slower (for a given engine and stall speed), have less useful >>>> load and >>>> even with being a great kit they still tend to cost a fair amount to >>>> finish >>>> and take a fair amount of time. Most of the RV 7s are over 1200 lbs >>>> empty >>>> weight! I think even your big engine IFR TR1 is well under 1000 lbs. >>>> Or was >>>> it well under 900 lbs? >>>> >>>> I know being part of the RV club has it's own draw but I think your >>>> plane is a >>>> much better choice. Yes there are problems with the TR1. But at least >>>> the >>>> wings tend to stay on. >>>> >>>> Mark >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Scott Stearns >>>>> Sent: Oct 26, 2010 4:00 PM >>>>> To: kis-list@matronics.com >>>>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>>>> >>>>> An RV fastbuild kit hands down. If you build the Cruiser then you'll >>>>> have >>>>> that RV done in a year if you buy that fastbuild and FWF kits. >>>>> >>>>> The lancair is a great airplane, but the cost is much higher for the >>>>> kit, the >>>>> engine, and the RG insurance will be a lot higher. It is fast, but >>>>> the >>>>> landing speed is much higher too. Unless you do a lot of long range >>>>> cross >>>>> country and don't plan on flying into any shorter strips, then I don't >>>>> think >>>>> you'll get a lot for the extra money. >>>>> >>>>> Also, a well built RV is pretty easy to sell. I kind of with I would >>>>> have >>>>> built an RV. >>>>> >>>>> Scott >>>>> >>>>> --- On Mon, 10/25/10, John Petrie wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> From: John Petrie >>>>> Subject: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>>>> To: "KIS-List Digest Server" >>>>> Date: Monday, October 25, 2010, 9:08 PM >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> Its been 14 years since I received my KIS Cruiser kit and 10 years of >>>>> successful flying. However, the idea of the 4 seats being constantly >>>>> filled >>>>> by my family appears to be more of a dream than a reality. As a >>>>> result, I >>>>> have just sold my plane and am now looking for a 2 place kit which I >>>>> can >>>>> enjoy with my one son who is also passionate about aircraft. So, I was >>>>> hoping >>>>> someone on this list could give me some useful advice on which >>>>> direction to >>>>> follow. >>>>> I am currently looking at either an RV7 or a Lancair 360. I really do >>>>> like >>>>> the speed of the Lancair, but also the simplicity of the RV. >>>>> Does anyone have any other better suggestions and advice? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks in anticipation. >>>>> John >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>&ghref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?KIS-List" >>target=_blank>http:/ - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS; -Matt Dralle, >>List Admin========= > > > This communication, including any attachments, may contain confidential information and is intended only for the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. Any review, dissemination or copying of this communication by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and delete all copies of the original message. ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 03:43:12 PM PST US From: jason@hills.org Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold Yeah, my understanding is it was largely built by "factory" guys. Someone else has mentioned that one of the people familiar with its build may be up in the Scappoose, OR area as well, but I've never followed up on that. It is still yellow nose/cowling transitioning to white tail with a small blue stripe(s) on the fuse and wings. The paint is showing some aging, but it looks good from 10 feet away. It's lived in hangers most of the last 16 years I think. I'm the 4th, and I believe longest owner now (I bought in March 2005). A few weeks ago I flew down to KCMA (from KPAE) with it. The log book has early records of flying between KOXR and KCMA for some engine work. Assuming it was test-flown somewhere down in that area. It's a great plane. Looks good, flies well, is super economical, especially for longer x-country travel, which is something I really enjoy. ...Jason Oct 27, 2010 12:41:23 PM, kis-list@matronics.com wrote: ========================================== JasonYea that was built mostly by chuck and Dick was fairly short so they put thick seats in that also. I think I also flew that plane. Is it still Yellow or did you paint it.RICH --- On Wed, 10/27/10, jason@hills.org wrote: From: jason@hills.org Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold My plane was Richard Warden's tail-dragger (serial number 51 I believe), but the seats are fairly thick. Worth looking into! Thanks. ...Jason Oct 27, 2010 10:13:41 AM, kis-list@matronics.com wrote: ================= JasonI am 6-2 and have no trouble. I am not sure but dot you have Kirby jeffersons plane. If so I know his seate were really fay > I did the test flight and was scrunched pretty bad. I would redo the seats. Follow the manual and thind down the cushions. when proper the back seat botton is almost none existant.. Rich --- On Wed, 10/27/10, Jason Hills wrote: From: Jason Hills Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold I haven't been in a Lancair 360, but I think the 235 is almost the same plane. Somewhere between 235 and 360 they changed the tail to improve stall/spin characteristics, but I still would avoid stalls/spins in that family of planes... The cockpits are likely similar. Compared to the TR-1 the Lancair 235 reclines people more. I think that improves comfort for tall people. Width is snug like the TR-1. My biggest problem with my plane's cockpit is anyone over 6'1" or 2" just doesn't fit (half my friends who would like to go flying). They have to bend their head sideways. At 6' I have to be careful what headset I use or the band brushes the ceiling and transmits engine vibration to me. Annoying! My Zulu works great as long as I'm left seat (right seat is 1/2" worse to clear the transponder plate and fitting below the seat). ...Jason On Oct 27, 2010, at 5:48 AM, Mark Kettering wrote: > > Hi John, > > I think Scott answered 1 and 3. I do not know how large the Lancair cockpit is. I remember seeing a web page that listed cockpit widths sometime ago but do not remember where. Also width does not tell the whole story. You really need to go and sit in them yourself to try them out for size and shape. > > Mark > > > -----Original Message----- >> From: John Petrie >> Sent: Oct 26, 2010 10:53 PM >> To: kis-list@matronics.com >> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >> >> >> Mark, >> >> You make a very good argument for the TR-1. I have a few questions though: >> 1. What do you mean by "...the wings tend to stay on"? >> 2. How does the cockpit size compare to the Lancair? >> 3. Is it really possible to fit an O-360 to the TR-1 and if so, what are the >> CG implications? >> >> John >> >> >> >> >>> From: Mark Kettering >>> Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 21:47:04 -0400 (EDT) >>> To: >>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>> >>> >>> Hi Scott, >>> >>> In many ways the RV 7 kits are the best kits in the world. Fantastic fit, >>> instructions, factory support, third party support, options, resale value and >>> much more. But they are not the best aircraft. They are little more than a >>> kit of 1960's designs like the Grummans or others. Compared to a more modern >>> composite aircraft they really are not all that good of performers. They tend >>> to be slower (for a given engine and stall speed), have less useful load and >>> even with being a great kit they still tend to cost a fair amount to finish >>> and take a fair amount of time. Most of the RV 7s are over 1200 lbs empty >>> weight! I think even your big engine IFR TR1 is well under 1000 lbs. Or was >>> it well under 900 lbs? >>> >>> I know being part of the RV club has it's own draw but I think your plane is a >>> much better choice. Yes there are problems with the TR1. But at least the >>> wings tend to stay on. >>> >>> Mark >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Scott Stearns >>>> Sent: Oct 26, 2010 4:00 PM >>>> To: kis-list@matronics.com >>>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>>> >>>> An RV fastbuild kit hands down. If you build the Cruiser then you'll have >>>> that RV done in a year if you buy that fastbuild and FWF kits. >>>> >>>> The lancair is a great airplane, but the cost is much higher for the kit, the >>>> engine, and the RG insurance will be a lot higher. It is fast, but the >>>> landing speed is much higher too. Unless you do a lot of long range cross >>>> country and don't plan on flying into any shorter strips, then I don't think >>>> you'll get a lot for the extra money. >>>> >>>> Also, a well built RV is pretty easy to sell. I kind of with I would have >>>> built an RV. >>>> >>>> Scott >>>> >>>> --- On Mon, 10/25/10, John Petrie wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> From: John Petrie >>>> Subject: KIS-List: KIS Sold >>>> To: "KIS-List Digest Server" >>>> Date: Monday, October 25, 2010, 9:08 PM >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> Its been 14 years since I received my KIS Cruiser kit and 10 years of >>>> successful flying. However, the idea of the 4 seats being constantly filled >>>> by my family appears to be more of a dream than a reality. As a result, I >>>> have just sold my plane and am now looking for a 2 place kit which I can >>>> enjoy with my one son who is also passionate about aircraft. So, I was hoping >>>> someone on this list could give me some useful advice on which direction to >>>> follow. >>>> I am currently looking at either an RV7 or a Lancair 360. I really do like >>>> the speed of the Lancair, but also the simplicity of the RV. >>>> Does anyone have any other better suggestions and advice? >>>> >>>> Thanks in anticipation. >>>> John >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >&ghref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?KIS-List" target=_blank>http:/ - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS; -Matt Dralle, List Admin=====matronics.com/Navigator?KIS-List" target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/= - MATRONICS sp; A href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution" target=_blank>http://www====================== ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 06:43:33 PM PST US From: Subject: KIS-List: Re: KIS TR-1C Autopilot 10/27/2010 Hello Jason, This looks like the Tru Trak autopilot that my hangar partner has in his RV-7. http://www.trutrakflightsystems.com/products/Digitrak.html The main complaint that I recall is that while operating the autopilot could become uncoupled or OFF (maybe by inadvertently bumping a switch) and there was no visible indication of that uncoupled status on the instrument panel. I will include him as a bcc addressee on this email and he might have more to offer. Two other factors that steered me toward the Tri Avionics EZ Pilot and away from the Digitrak were: 1) The two buttons only manipulation on the Tru Trak Digitrak did not seem very intuitive to me with multipurpose use of the buttons along with timing and remembering what did what when. 2) The ability and ease with which I could use my already installed Navaid 1 AP servo. 'OC' Baker Says: "The best investment we can make is the time and effort to gather and understand knowledge." =============================================== ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jason Hills" Cc: "KIS-LIST, MATRONICS" Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 12:09 PM Subject: Re: KIS TR-1C Autopilot OC, What issues has your hanger partner had with the TruTrak? I know one RV-10 where there were some initial issues with the trim that caused some unsafe pitch excursions, but everyone I know loves theirs (including the RV-10 owner). Worth checking out other options too of course. I won't be doing that upgrade until next fall or winter most likely. ...Jason ====================================================== On Oct 27, 2010, at 4:27 AM, wrote: > 10/27/2010 > > Hello Jason, You wrote: "....then probably adding a TruTrak autopilot > coupled to the 430W..." > > I know that Tru Trak is the big bear in the autopilot market, but before > you go that way please take a close look at the Trio Avionics products: > > http://www.trioavionics.com/ > > My hangar partner has a Tru Trak autopilot in his RV-7 and he was not > completely satisfied with it so I put an EZ Pilot control head in my KIS > TR-1 coupled to my GNS 430W with his help. I used Trio's wiring harness > adapter and my already installed Navaid AP 1 servo. It works great and I > am very satisfied with it. > > 'OC' Baker Says: "The best investment we can make is the time and effort > to gather and understand knowledge." > > ========================================================== > > Scott/Mark, > > I'm not planning any major engine upgrades for my plane, at least not just > yet... I just overhauled the engine 2 years ago. > > Current projects are getting the bugs out of the new engine monitor system > (JPI EDM 740), improving engine cooling (problems found with the new > engine monitor), then probably adding a TruTrak autopilot coupled to the > 430W, and upgrading to a more efficient prop. Maybe after all of that if I > need more speed I'll consider doing some upgrades to the engine.... > > For whoever asked, my plane is a taildragger, and I did add gear leg > intersection fairings this past summer. We considered fairing the legs > themselves, but decided it probably wasn't really worth the effort, at > least for now. > > Of course I'm also building an RV-8 in my garage. Not because the KIS > isn't a good plane, just because I want to build an RV. I do appreciate > the short field performance, lower stall speed and higher aerobatic > g-limits of the RV (compared to the KIS), and I really like the tandem > design. Plus I didn't build my KIS, and I'm having a lot of fun building. > Although I've learned a TON working on the TR-1c the past 5.5 years... > having now pretty much redone the firewall forward and the panel. > > ...Jason ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message kis-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/KIS-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/kis-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/kis-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.