Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:52 AM - Model 5, Subaru and Batterry (Trey Moran)
2. 05:05 AM - Re: wing tanks and header tank vents. (Dee Young)
3. 06:08 AM - Re: Engine choices (Fox5flyer)
4. 07:19 AM - Re: Engine choices (~~Shorty~~)
5. 07:31 AM - Re: Engine choices (~~Shorty~~)
6. 08:56 AM - Re: model IV wing tanks (Lynn Matteson)
7. 09:16 AM - Re: 8" Aluminium rims (Lynn Matteson)
8. 09:33 AM - Re: 8" Aluminium rims (customtrans@qwest.net)
9. 09:46 AM - Re: 8" Aluminium rims (~~Shorty~~)
10. 09:56 AM - Re: Model 5, Subaru and Batterry (Rick)
11. 11:09 AM - FYI....Couple of Canadian Kitfoxes for sale (kitfoxjunky)
12. 11:42 AM - Re: FYI....Couple of Canadian Kitfoxes for sale (Gary Algate)
13. 12:24 PM - Re: Engine choices (Lowell Fitt)
14. 12:35 PM - Compass Mounting (John Stoner)
15. 12:46 PM - Re: Engine choices (Fox5flyer)
16. 12:47 PM - Re: Engine choices (~~Shorty~~)
17. 12:54 PM - Re: Engine choices (~~Shorty~~)
18. 01:10 PM - Re: Engine choices moreo n NSI wieght (~~Shorty~~)
19. 02:28 PM - Re: long XC (Jeffrey Puls)
20. 02:33 PM - My Bluehead 582 140lb Engine choice (Harris, Robert)
21. 02:50 PM - Re: Engine choices (Clint Bazzill)
22. 03:34 PM - Re: model IV wing tanks (AlbertaIV@aol.com)
23. 03:48 PM - Re: FYI....Couple of Canadian Kitfoxes for sale (~~Shorty~~)
24. 04:29 PM - Re: model IV wing tanks (Lynn Matteson)
25. 04:36 PM - Re: cutting exhaust pipe (Torgeir Mortensen)
26. 04:54 PM - Cafe Foundation. (Torgeir Mortensen)
27. 06:43 PM - Re: model IV wing tanks (Steve Zakreski)
28. 07:12 PM - Re: model IV wing tanks (Jerry Liles)
29. 08:01 PM - Re: Engine choices ()
30. 08:18 PM - Re: Re: Engine choices (Dee Young)
31. 08:34 PM - Re: Re: Engine choices (Steve Zakreski)
32. 09:43 PM - Post Photos (Steve Zakreski)
33. 09:51 PM - Compass (Rex & Jan Shaw)
34. 10:11 PM - Fuel cap (Rex & Jan Shaw)
35. 10:11 PM - Re: Post Photos (Don Pearsall)
36. 11:02 PM - Re: Model 5, Subaru and Batterry (kurt schrader)
37. 11:16 PM - Re: model IV wing tanks (kurt schrader)
38. 11:55 PM - Re: Engine choices (kurt schrader)
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: | Model 5, Subaru and Batterry |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Trey Moran" <ffmoran@centurytel.net>
Question for Model 5 builders or flyers with Subaru EA81 engines, preferably with
a Stratus, but will take info on NSI. I don't like the idea of putting the
battery in the tail and was hoping someone has put the battery more forward and
can provide cg info. It would also be helpful to have cg numbers, including
weight and arm for the battery, for a plane with the forward swept wing so I
could do some what if cg calculations.
Trey Moran
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: wing tanks and header tank vents. |
Seal-Send-Time: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 06:04:14 -0700
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dee Young" <henrysfork1@msn.com>
Kurt
The air can be sucked in but not pushed out same as fuel.
Dee,
One last question. Does the air go out of the header
tank thru this vent valve too? In other words, does
the valve let air go both ways, but fuel can not vent
out?
>
> Dee Young
> Model II
> N345DY
>
> Do Not Archive
__________________________________
http://my.yahoo.com<http://my.yahoo.com/>
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: | Re: Engine choices |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Fox5flyer" <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
From: "~~Shorty~~" <shortnaked@golden.net>
> Suberu is the heaviest choice of the 582 and 912.
> I would take a 912 over a suberu any day until the cost factor came into
the
> equasion.
> Then if you area die hard that must have a 4 stroke and cost is a factor
> Sure suberu the penalty is extra 200 lbs over a 582 and "possibly " less
> maintenance
Just a couple questions here. Why are you lumping the 582 in with the
912 and Subaru? Also, I question your 200lb penalty of the 582 over the
Subaru. Having both of these packages and weighed both I was very surprised
to read your numbers. Please give us a credible source for your above
information.
Also, unfortunately for some of us, the cost factor does come into the
equation.
> Performance I not sure I have asked several times on this list for Numbers
> of performance 582 vs Suberu but not read it yet.
This is typical apples and oranges Shorty. Why would you want to
compare performance of a 582 vs Subaru? What would it tell anybody? Would
you put a 582 into a S5? To me it's no different than comparing a 582 with
an O200. No comparison because I can't imagine anybody seriously
considering choosing between the two. No merit.
The 582 is a great engine, but is not meant for the same mission as the 0200
or Subaru.
Deke
Message 4
| 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: Engine choices |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "~~Shorty~~" <shortnaked@golden.net>
A little defensvive there deke ?
Show me a KF IV with Jaerbu under 600 lbs
and it is relevant not everyone wants a jabiru or a rotax but you gotta show
the differnces.
582 vs Jabiru
post some IV number please ..
TAKE distance
CLIMB FPM
Crusie
etc
Jabiru - what is the weight of some KF IV's with those "heavy " engines?
and also some 582 weights ?
Power to weight 582 gonna win hands down.
Open for discussion.
Shorty <_--- Like to see the defensive side to some good folks :)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fox5flyer" <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Engine choices
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Fox5flyer" <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
>
> From: "~~Shorty~~" <shortnaked@golden.net>
> > Suberu is the heaviest choice of the 582 and 912.
> > I would take a 912 over a suberu any day until the cost factor came into
> the
> > equasion.
> > Then if you area die hard that must have a 4 stroke and cost is a factor
> > Sure suberu the penalty is extra 200 lbs over a 582 and "possibly "
less
> > maintenance
>
> Just a couple questions here. Why are you lumping the 582 in with the
> 912 and Subaru? Also, I question your 200lb penalty of the 582 over the
> Subaru. Having both of these packages and weighed both I was very
surprised
> to read your numbers. Please give us a credible source for your above
> information.
> Also, unfortunately for some of us, the cost factor does come into the
> equation.
>
> > Performance I not sure I have asked several times on this list for
Numbers
> > of performance 582 vs Suberu but not read it yet.
>
> This is typical apples and oranges Shorty. Why would you want to
> compare performance of a 582 vs Subaru? What would it tell anybody?
Would
> you put a 582 into a S5? To me it's no different than comparing a 582
with
> an O200. No comparison because I can't imagine anybody seriously
> considering choosing between the two. No merit.
> The 582 is a great engine, but is not meant for the same mission as the
0200
> or Subaru.
> Deke
>
>
Message 5
| 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: Engine choices |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "~~Shorty~~" <shortnaked@golden.net>
here you go under 600 lbs with Jabieru
http://www.algonet.se/~lgk-alv/teknxof.htm
Excellent !!
I find it hard to belive that so many are over 700 lbs
oh well to each his own.
shorty
----- Original Message -----
From: "~~Shorty~~" <shortnaked@golden.net>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Engine choices
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "~~Shorty~~" <shortnaked@golden.net>
>
> A little defensvive there deke ?
>
> Show me a KF IV with Jaerbu under 600 lbs
>
> and it is relevant not everyone wants a jabiru or a rotax but you gotta
show
> the differnces.
>
> 582 vs Jabiru
>
> post some IV number please ..
>
> TAKE distance
> CLIMB FPM
> Crusie
> etc
>
>
> Jabiru - what is the weight of some KF IV's with those "heavy " engines?
> and also some 582 weights ?
>
> Power to weight 582 gonna win hands down.
>
>
> Open for discussion.
>
>
> Shorty <_--- Like to see the defensive side to some good folks :)
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Fox5flyer" <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Engine choices
>
>
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Fox5flyer"
<morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
> >
> > From: "~~Shorty~~" <shortnaked@golden.net>
> > > Suberu is the heaviest choice of the 582 and 912.
> > > I would take a 912 over a suberu any day until the cost factor came
into
> > the
> > > equasion.
> > > Then if you area die hard that must have a 4 stroke and cost is a
factor
> > > Sure suberu the penalty is extra 200 lbs over a 582 and "possibly "
> less
> > > maintenance
> >
> > Just a couple questions here. Why are you lumping the 582 in with
the
> > 912 and Subaru? Also, I question your 200lb penalty of the 582 over the
> > Subaru. Having both of these packages and weighed both I was very
> surprised
> > to read your numbers. Please give us a credible source for your above
> > information.
> > Also, unfortunately for some of us, the cost factor does come into the
> > equation.
> >
> > > Performance I not sure I have asked several times on this list for
> Numbers
> > > of performance 582 vs Suberu but not read it yet.
> >
> > This is typical apples and oranges Shorty. Why would you want to
> > compare performance of a 582 vs Subaru? What would it tell anybody?
> Would
> > you put a 582 into a S5? To me it's no different than comparing a 582
> with
> > an O200. No comparison because I can't imagine anybody seriously
> > considering choosing between the two. No merit.
> > The 582 is a great engine, but is not meant for the same mission as the
> 0200
> > or Subaru.
> > Deke
> >
> >
>
>
Message 6
| 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: model IV wing tanks |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
Maybe somebody needs to come up with a seal that would prevent fuel
from getting into the flaperon....sort of like maybe a piece of
flexible material that is fuel-resistant, with a slit cut into it, slid
down over the protruding flap hinge arm, which would allow the arm
movement, but would seal the opening (pretty much) around the arm.
Think of a piece of old inner tube (I know...not fuel resistant, but
you get the idea). There you have it...or we could just avoid the leak
in the first place. : )
Lynn
p.s. Maybe these "flap hinge slot seals" would reduce drag? Boy, I can
see the line forming at the patent office now.
On Monday, January 10, 2005, at 01:35 PM, AlbertaIV@aol.com wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: AlbertaIV@aol.com
>
> In a message dated 1/10/05 8:46:43 AM Pacific Standard Time,
> lynnmatt@jps.net
> writes:
>
> << Thanks for clearing that up, Don. I was going to vent them like you
> did, after reading about fuel spillage possibly getting into the
> flaperons and causing damage. If the SS venting sy >>
>
> Let me clear that one up. I only get a little fuel spillage during
> taxi with
> full tanks. And that only occurs during a ground turn. The vents are
> toward
> the leading edge and the fuel never gets anywhere near the
> flapperons. On
> the other hand, fuel leaking on top of a wing could roll off directly
> into the
> flapperons. Good point.
>
> Don Smythe
> N-998DS Classic IV W/ 582
>
>
Message 7
| 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: 8" Aluminium rims |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
Having nothing better to do while waiting for stuff to dry, harden,
cure, etc., I put the spindles/axles in my lathe and began the long
slow (over 3 hours) process of drilling them out to 7/16" and then
boring the ends to 9/16"....I decided to get an extra long 7/16" drill
(10" long) rather than go at it from both ends with a regular
jobber-length drill. Surprisingly, the drill was under 10 bucks. What
took so long was constantly having to back the drill out and clear
chips from the flutes. In 8" of drilling, those chips get pretty packed
in there. I lightened each axle by 7 oz...a h___ of a lot of work for
14 oz!
Anyway, now I've got 'em lightened, but what happens if I decide to get
a Grove gear? Will I be able to use these axles? And if I go Grove,
will I be able to use the wheel pants? I'm sure that the pants can be
adapted, but what about the axles?
Lynn
On Sunday, January 9, 2005, at 08:07 PM, ~~Shorty~~ wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "~~Shorty~~" <shortnaked@golden.net>
>
> Glad to hear you lightened your rotors, now are you gonna turn the
> inside
> of the spindle as well? you will save I think about 1 or 1 1/2
> pounds more
> from lightening them.
>
> Hope this helps you,
>
>
> Shorty
>>
>
>
Message 8
| 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: | 8" Aluminium rims |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: customtrans@qwest.net
you get new axles. I'm still pretty excited about the grove gear. Although
I haven't flown with them yet. I see: no more bungies to worry about, I
feel that better control on landing and roll out will be there, and it plan
just looks good. Have a nice day.
steve a
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Lynn
Matteson
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: 8" Aluminium rims
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
Having nothing better to do while waiting for stuff to dry, harden,
cure, etc., I put the spindles/axles in my lathe and began the long
slow (over 3 hours) process of drilling them out to 7/16" and then
boring the ends to 9/16"....I decided to get an extra long 7/16" drill
(10" long) rather than go at it from both ends with a regular
jobber-length drill. Surprisingly, the drill was under 10 bucks. What
took so long was constantly having to back the drill out and clear
chips from the flutes. In 8" of drilling, those chips get pretty packed
in there. I lightened each axle by 7 oz...a h___ of a lot of work for
14 oz!
Anyway, now I've got 'em lightened, but what happens if I decide to get
a Grove gear? Will I be able to use these axles? And if I go Grove,
will I be able to use the wheel pants? I'm sure that the pants can be
adapted, but what about the axles?
Lynn
On Sunday, January 9, 2005, at 08:07 PM, ~~Shorty~~ wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "~~Shorty~~" <shortnaked@golden.net>
>
> Glad to hear you lightened your rotors, now are you gonna turn the
> inside
> of the spindle as well? you will save I think about 1 or 1 1/2
> pounds more
> from lightening them.
>
> Hope this helps you,
>
>
> Shorty
>>
>
>
Message 9
| 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: 8" Aluminium rims |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "~~Shorty~~" <shortnaked@golden.net>
Geez Good question Lynn,
I was off by 2 ozs. well darn.
It might not seem like much but it all adds up to less weight.
and 2006 ? go man go !!
Shorty
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lynn Matteson" <lynnmatt@jps.net>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: 8" Aluminium rims
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
>
> Having nothing better to do while waiting for stuff to dry, harden,
> cure, etc., I put the spindles/axles in my lathe and began the long
> slow (over 3 hours) process of drilling them out to 7/16" and then
> boring the ends to 9/16"....I decided to get an extra long 7/16" drill
> (10" long) rather than go at it from both ends with a regular
> jobber-length drill. Surprisingly, the drill was under 10 bucks. What
> took so long was constantly having to back the drill out and clear
> chips from the flutes. In 8" of drilling, those chips get pretty packed
> in there. I lightened each axle by 7 oz...a h___ of a lot of work for
> 14 oz!
> Anyway, now I've got 'em lightened, but what happens if I decide to get
> a Grove gear? Will I be able to use these axles? And if I go Grove,
> will I be able to use the wheel pants? I'm sure that the pants can be
> adapted, but what about the axles?
> Lynn
> On Sunday, January 9, 2005, at 08:07 PM, ~~Shorty~~ wrote:
>
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "~~Shorty~~" <shortnaked@golden.net>
> >
>
> > Glad to hear you lightened your rotors, now are you gonna turn the
> > inside
> > of the spindle as well? you will save I think about 1 or 1 1/2
> > pounds more
> > from lightening them.
> >
> > Hope this helps you,
> >
> >
> > Shorty
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 10
| 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: | Model 5, Subaru and Batterry |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rick" <turboflyer@comcast.net>
Tery,
Take a look at sportflight pics of back battery. You might be able to do
something a bit bigger, these have good crank amp if wired that way. I did
this one in addition to the RG35 I have in the tail. You may find to get
good numbers you will either need a LOT of lead in the tail or something
useful like a big battery. I have the sweep wings and even then it was
necessary. Don't have the numbers handy but I think this tail mount is
consistent for NSI, Stratus or similar weight engine redrive combinations.
Dont IMHO try to save weight on the nose by going direct drive with an auto
conversion. They were not designed for the tonsorial loads imparted by the
prop. Good luck.
Rick
Corona Ca
CNO
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Trey Moran
Subject: Kitfox-List: Model 5, Subaru and Batterry
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Trey Moran" <ffmoran@centurytel.net>
Question for Model 5 builders or flyers with Subaru EA81 engines, preferably
with a Stratus, but will take info on NSI. I don't like the idea of putting
the battery in the tail and was hoping someone has put the battery more
forward and can provide cg info. It would also be helpful to have cg
numbers, including weight and arm for the battery, for a plane with the
forward swept wing so I could do some what if cg calculations.
Trey Moran
Message 11
| 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: | FYI....Couple of Canadian Kitfoxes for sale |
02:07:25 PM,
Serialize complete at 01/11/2005 02:07:25 PM
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kitfoxjunky <kitfoxjunky@decisionlabs.com>
I recently bought an exhaust system for my 912S from a guy near Toronto.
He has a KF III for sale, finished thru silver. I put his pictures onto a
web page as a way of saying thanks for helping me on the exhaust. He has
wingtips, several Soob engines, and other bits and pieces if anyone is
interested. Jim Oke is his name. Used to be on the list years ago. Nice
guy to deal with. Mention my name if you buy something. He said there was
a steak and beer in it for me. :-)
http://www.decisionlabs.com/oke
I also ran across a Kitfox II for sale, again here in Canada close to
Toronto. Check it out if you are interested. It is listed under single
engine aircraft. $ 26,500 Canadian. Rotax 582 bluehead engine.
http://www.aircraftsales.ca/showplane.php
Gary Walsh
C-GOOT
www.decisionlabs.com/kitfox
Message 12
| 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: | FYI....Couple of Canadian Kitfoxes for sale |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Gary Algate" <algate@attglobal.net>
The Model II with Bluehead is located at Springwater Airpark in Barrie. I
know the gentleman who is selling it and have had the opportunity to have a
close look at the plane. It is beautifully built and the Bluehead has very
low hours.
It is owned by a partnership of two but evidently it's not working out -
hence the sale.
Plane is finished in Yellow and looks really nice.
Guys name is Carl
Regards
GaryA
Lite2/582
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of kitfoxjunky
Subject: Kitfox-List: FYI....Couple of Canadian Kitfoxes for sale
I also ran across a Kitfox II for sale, again here in Canada close to
Toronto. Check it out if you are interested. It is listed under single
engine aircraft. $ 26,500 Canadian. Rotax 582 bluehead engine.
http://www.aircraftsales.ca/showplane.php
Gary Walsh
C-GOOT
www.decisionlabs.com/kitfox
Message 13
| 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: Engine choices |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@inreach.com>
The only figure I have seen comparing the 912 and the NSI EA81 was
determined by Murle Williams who owns a builders support company and has a
number of aftermarket items for the various Kitfox models.
He had both engine installations handy at the time. He weighed both systems
on the same platform scale. On the same day, as I understand. The weights
included the engine with all components - fuel system, cooling system,
engine mount and fluids. Everything except the cowl. The weights are as
follows.
NSI EA81 304 lbs.
Rotax 912 UL 169 lbs.
This might look like 200 lbs difference at first glance, but it is not.
Lowell
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fox5flyer" <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Engine choices
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Fox5flyer" <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
>
> From: "~~Shorty~~" <shortnaked@golden.net>
> > Suberu is the heaviest choice of the 582 and 912.
> > I would take a 912 over a suberu any day until the cost factor came into
> the
> > equasion.
> > Then if you area die hard that must have a 4 stroke and cost is a factor
> > Sure suberu the penalty is extra 200 lbs over a 582 and "possibly "
less
> > maintenance
>
> Just a couple questions here. Why are you lumping the 582 in with the
> 912 and Subaru? Also, I question your 200lb penalty of the 582 over the
> Subaru. Having both of these packages and weighed both I was very
surprised
> to read your numbers. Please give us a credible source for your above
> information.
> Also, unfortunately for some of us, the cost factor does come into the
> equation.
>
> > Performance I not sure I have asked several times on this list for
Numbers
> > of performance 582 vs Suberu but not read it yet.
>
> This is typical apples and oranges Shorty. Why would you want to
> compare performance of a 582 vs Subaru? What would it tell anybody?
Would
> you put a 582 into a S5? To me it's no different than comparing a 582
with
> an O200. No comparison because I can't imagine anybody seriously
> considering choosing between the two. No merit.
> The 582 is a great engine, but is not meant for the same mission as the
0200
> or Subaru.
> Deke
>
>
> BEGIN-ANTISPAM-VOTING-LINKS
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Teach CanIt if this mail (ID 77143481) is spam:
> Spam:
http://login.safereach.com/b.php?c=s&i=77143481&m=a15d3d0e1e90
> Not spam:
http://login.safereach.com/b.php?c=n&i=77143481&m=a15d3d0e1e90
> Forget vote:
http://login.safereach.com/b.php?c=f&i=77143481&m=a15d3d0e1e90
> ------------------------------------------------------
> END-ANTISPAM-VOTING-LINKS
>
>
Message 14
| 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: | Compass Mounting |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "John Stoner" <john@dakotacubaircraft.com>
I have a Hamilton vertical card compass mounted in the panel at top center.
Drilled a hole to line up with the front compensator screw.
Has worked great for over ten years now.
John Stoner
M.III, 582
Message 15
| 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: Engine choices |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Fox5flyer" <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
The exact weight for the NSI EA81 with everything including radiator,
radiator hoses, cables, motor mount, tanks, etc is 232 lbs. This isn't
heresay. I weighed it myself just so I would know for sure. It appears
that either somebody's scale is off by a whole bunch or the numbers got
mixed up. Another year and the NSI will be over 400 pounds.
Deke
>
> The only figure I have seen comparing the 912 and the NSI EA81 was
> determined by Murle Williams who owns a builders support company and has a
> number of aftermarket items for the various Kitfox models.
>
> He had both engine installations handy at the time. He weighed both
systems
> on the same platform scale. On the same day, as I understand. The
weights
> included the engine with all components - fuel system, cooling system,
> engine mount and fluids. Everything except the cowl. The weights are as
> follows.
>
> NSI EA81 304 lbs.
> Rotax 912 UL 169 lbs.
>
> This might look like 200 lbs difference at first glance, but it is not.
Message 16
| 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: Engine choices |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "~~Shorty~~" <shortnaked@golden.net>
Lowell,
Good post , What does 582 weigh?
Shorty
<<<He had both engine installations handy at the time. He weighed both
systems
> on the same platform scale. On the same day, as I understand. The
weights
> included the engine with all components - fuel system, cooling system,
> engine mount and fluids. Everything except the cowl. The weights are as
> follows.
>
> NSI EA81 304 lbs.
> Rotax 912 UL 169 lbs.>>>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@inreach.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Engine choices
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@inreach.com>
>
> The only figure I have seen comparing the 912 and the NSI EA81 was
> determined by Murle Williams who owns a builders support company and has a
> number of aftermarket items for the various Kitfox models.
>
> He had both engine installations handy at the time. He weighed both
systems
> on the same platform scale. On the same day, as I understand. The
weights
> included the engine with all components - fuel system, cooling system,
> engine mount and fluids. Everything except the cowl. The weights are as
> follows.
>
> NSI EA81 304 lbs.
> Rotax 912 UL 169 lbs.
>
> This might look like 200 lbs difference at first glance, but it is not.
>
> Lowell
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Fox5flyer" <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Engine choices
>
>
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Fox5flyer"
<morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
> >
> > From: "~~Shorty~~" <shortnaked@golden.net>
> > > Suberu is the heaviest choice of the 582 and 912.
> > > I would take a 912 over a suberu any day until the cost factor came
into
> > the
> > > equasion.
> > > Then if you area die hard that must have a 4 stroke and cost is a
factor
> > > Sure suberu the penalty is extra 200 lbs over a 582 and "possibly "
> less
> > > maintenance
> >
> > Just a couple questions here. Why are you lumping the 582 in with
the
> > 912 and Subaru? Also, I question your 200lb penalty of the 582 over the
> > Subaru. Having both of these packages and weighed both I was very
> surprised
> > to read your numbers. Please give us a credible source for your above
> > information.
> > Also, unfortunately for some of us, the cost factor does come into the
> > equation.
> >
> > > Performance I not sure I have asked several times on this list for
> Numbers
> > > of performance 582 vs Suberu but not read it yet.
> >
> > This is typical apples and oranges Shorty. Why would you want to
> > compare performance of a 582 vs Subaru? What would it tell anybody?
> Would
> > you put a 582 into a S5? To me it's no different than comparing a 582
> with
> > an O200. No comparison because I can't imagine anybody seriously
> > considering choosing between the two. No merit.
> > The 582 is a great engine, but is not meant for the same mission as the
> 0200
> > or Subaru.
> > Deke
> >
> >
> > BEGIN-ANTISPAM-VOTING-LINKS
> > ------------------------------------------------------
> > Teach CanIt if this mail (ID 77143481) is spam:
> > Spam:
> http://login.safereach.com/b.php?c=s&i=77143481&m=a15d3d0e1e90
> > Not spam:
> http://login.safereach.com/b.php?c=n&i=77143481&m=a15d3d0e1e90
> > Forget vote:
> http://login.safereach.com/b.php?c=f&i=77143481&m=a15d3d0e1e90
> > ------------------------------------------------------
> > END-ANTISPAM-VOTING-LINKS
> >
> >
>
>
Message 17
| 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: Engine choices |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "~~Shorty~~" <shortnaked@golden.net>
More on Murle, Guy a real guru it seems , nice find Lowell
http://www.desertfoxsquadron.org/Murle%20&%20Donna%20Williams.htm
Murle and Donna Williams
N915W, Series 5-1550, Rotax 914 Turbo murle.williams@juno.com
Murle is a native of Arizona. He has been involved in aviation for 25 years.
He is the builder of a Light Airplane Grand Champion for Skystar and Sun and
Fun with a Kitfox Model 3. He also holds the title of all out Grand Champion
at Sun and Fun with his Model 5-1550 (1997). Both aircraft were awarded
Champion Kit for Oshkosh (1993, 1997) He is also a recipient of the Wright
Brothers award. He is currently retired and is running a builders assistance
program and is the Poly Fiber representative for the Western states. He is
a Tech counselor, Flight advisor and A@P.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@inreach.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Engine choices
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@inreach.com>
>
> The only figure I have seen comparing the 912 and the NSI EA81 was
> determined by Murle Williams who owns a builders support company and has a
> number of aftermarket items for the various Kitfox models.
>
> He had both engine installations handy at the time. He weighed both
systems
> on the same platform scale. On the same day, as I understand. The
weights
> included the engine with all components - fuel system, cooling system,
> engine mount and fluids. Everything except the cowl. The weights are as
> follows.
>
> NSI EA81 304 lbs.
> Rotax 912 UL 169 lbs.
>
> This might look like 200 lbs difference at first glance, but it is not.
>
> Lowell
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Fox5flyer" <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Engine choices
>
>
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Fox5flyer"
<morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
> >
> > From: "~~Shorty~~" <shortnaked@golden.net>
> > > Suberu is the heaviest choice of the 582 and 912.
> > > I would take a 912 over a suberu any day until the cost factor came
into
> > the
> > > equasion.
> > > Then if you area die hard that must have a 4 stroke and cost is a
factor
> > > Sure suberu the penalty is extra 200 lbs over a 582 and "possibly "
> less
> > > maintenance
> >
> > Just a couple questions here. Why are you lumping the 582 in with
the
> > 912 and Subaru? Also, I question your 200lb penalty of the 582 over the
> > Subaru. Having both of these packages and weighed both I was very
> surprised
> > to read your numbers. Please give us a credible source for your above
> > information.
> > Also, unfortunately for some of us, the cost factor does come into the
> > equation.
> >
> > > Performance I not sure I have asked several times on this list for
> Numbers
> > > of performance 582 vs Suberu but not read it yet.
> >
> > This is typical apples and oranges Shorty. Why would you want to
> > compare performance of a 582 vs Subaru? What would it tell anybody?
> Would
> > you put a 582 into a S5? To me it's no different than comparing a 582
> with
> > an O200. No comparison because I can't imagine anybody seriously
> > considering choosing between the two. No merit.
> > The 582 is a great engine, but is not meant for the same mission as the
> 0200
> > or Subaru.
> > Deke
> >
> >
> > BEGIN-ANTISPAM-VOTING-LINKS
> > ------------------------------------------------------
> > Teach CanIt if this mail (ID 77143481) is spam:
> > Spam:
> http://login.safereach.com/b.php?c=s&i=77143481&m=a15d3d0e1e90
> > Not spam:
> http://login.safereach.com/b.php?c=n&i=77143481&m=a15d3d0e1e90
> > Forget vote:
> http://login.safereach.com/b.php?c=f&i=77143481&m=a15d3d0e1e90
> > ------------------------------------------------------
> > END-ANTISPAM-VOTING-LINKS
> >
> >
>
>
Message 18
| 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: Engine choices moreo n NSI wieght |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "~~Shorty~~" <shortnaked@golden.net>
Ok you must have the lite weight version there Deke,
All i know is how many Kitfoxes with the NSI weigh under 600 lbs?
I have showed you m now you show me . :-)
Shorty :)
http://www.loginet.nl/europa/euroengi.htm
NSI Subaru
The Subaru engines are real beauties, well engineered and powerful. They are
a bit heavy but MTOW compensation for the Europa/Subaru combination is on
its way. We saw one in take-off at Cranfield and it really points its nose
into the sky, the rate of climb must be incredible.
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/chris.sellen/May%2000%20Project%20news.htm
Again for a weight of 123lb incl. exhaust, generator, starter etc. you get
80hp and low fuel consumption. Unfortunately it's still very expensive in
Pietenpol terms at 6991. PFA Engineering was said to be unimpressed with
the efficiency of its prop at 3300-rpm given our modest cruise speeds. A
reduction-geared version is apparently under development.
http://www.nsiaero.com/nsiaero2/3.0/3.1/3.1.1/3.1.1.17/3.1.1.17.htm
EA81-108-TBI EA81-150-TTBI
Engine Module Weight (Dry)..................214
lbs..........................222 lbs.......
Typical Installed Engine Weight................242
lbs..........................263 lbs.......
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fox5flyer" <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Engine choices
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Fox5flyer" <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
>
> The exact weight for the NSI EA81 with everything including radiator,
> radiator hoses, cables, motor mount, tanks, etc is 232 lbs. This isn't
> heresay. I weighed it myself just so I would know for sure. It appears
> that either somebody's scale is off by a whole bunch or the numbers got
> mixed up. Another year and the NSI will be over 400 pounds.
> Deke
>
> >
> > The only figure I have seen comparing the 912 and the NSI EA81 was
> > determined by Murle Williams who owns a builders support company and has
a
> > number of aftermarket items for the various Kitfox models.
> >
> > He had both engine installations handy at the time. He weighed both
> systems
> > on the same platform scale. On the same day, as I understand. The
> weights
> > included the engine with all components - fuel system, cooling system,
> > engine mount and fluids. Everything except the cowl. The weights are
as
> > follows.
> >
> > NSI EA81 304 lbs.
> > Rotax 912 UL 169 lbs.
> >
> > This might look like 200 lbs difference at first glance, but it is not.
>
>
Message 19
| 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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Jeffrey Puls" <pulsair@mindspring.com>
Yes.
> [Original Message]
> From: Fox5flyer <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Date: 1/10/2005 4:48:00 PM
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: long XC
>
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Fox5flyer" <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
>
> You mean a trailer for a Kitfox?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeffrey Puls" <pulsair@mindspring.com>
> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: long XC
>
>
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Jeffrey Puls"
<pulsair@mindspring.com>
> >
> > I also have a trailer. Jeff
> >
> >
> > > [Original Message]
> > > From: Fox5flyer <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
> > > To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> > > Date: 1/10/2005 9:12:42 AM
> > > Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: long XC
> > >
> > > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Fox5flyer"
> <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
> > >
> > > Appreciate the offer Jeff and it may work out that way. I've got your
> > > number written down and will have it with me.
> > > Thanks much.
> > > Deke
> > >
> > > From: "Jeffrey Puls" <pulsair@mindspring.com>
> > > > Deke,
> > > > I am based in Columbus, Ohio at Bolton Field KTZR. They have a
> resturant
> > > on
> > > > the field and I can run you any whrere you need to go. My number is
> > > > 614-871-3155. If you have any problems in Ohio call me. Jeff puls
> > Classic
> > > > IV.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > [Original Message]
> > > > > From: Fox5flyer <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
> > > > > To: Kitfox List <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> > > > > Date: 1/9/2005 2:12:12 PM
> > > > > Subject: Kitfox-List: long XC
> > > > >
> > > > > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Fox5flyer"
> > > <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
> > > > >
> > > > > Next Wednesday I'll be flying commercial from here in Michigan to
> > > Florida.
> > > > > The purpose is to pick up a Kitfox and fly it home shortly after
as
> > the
> > > > > weather permits. I don't really know what my route will be, but
> I've
> > > got
> > > > > all the charts, directories, and current GPS196. The plan is to
fly
> > > point
> > > > > to point about 2.5 hours per leg with refueling at each stop,
close
> > old
> > > > > flight plan and open a new one each time. The reason for point to
> > point
> > > > is
> > > > > to keep my route and stops flexible. It's nearly 1200 miles and I
> > > figure
> > > > > about 11-12 hours flying time so I plan to take at least two days
to
> > > make
> > > > > the trip, however with weather it can easily take longer.
> > > > > My route will be generally direct from Tampa area, northward to
> > > somewhere
> > > > > near Knoxville, and onward up to NE Michigan. If flying
conditions
> > > allow
> > > > > I'm hoping to get 8 hours in the first day, but it's flexible.
> > > > > Anybody along that route that can recommend some fuel/food stops?
> Any
> > > > > airports that have accomodations within walking or courtesy car
> > > distance?
> > > > I
> > > > > haven't made a long cross country in a long time so any help or
> advice
> > > > would
> > > > > be appreciated.
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Deke Morisse
> > > > > NE Michigan
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
Message 20
| 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: | My Bluehead 582 140lb Engine choice |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Harris, Robert" <Robert_Harris@intuit.com>
Hi Shorty,
My Bluehead 582 installed weight is about 140.8 Lbs or 73.7Kg. How much does
your weigh?
I love my 582 on my Model II but I prefer a bigger engine on my 900lb model
V.
Robert
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of ~~Shorty~~
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Engine choices
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "~~Shorty~~" <shortnaked@golden.net>
Lowell,
Good post , What does 582 weigh?
Shorty
<<<He had both engine installations handy at the time. He weighed both
systems
> on the same platform scale. On the same day, as I understand. The
weights
> included the engine with all components - fuel system, cooling system,
> engine mount and fluids. Everything except the cowl. The weights are as
> follows.
>
> NSI EA81 304 lbs.
> Rotax 912 UL 169 lbs.>>>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@inreach.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Engine choices
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@inreach.com>
>
> The only figure I have seen comparing the 912 and the NSI EA81 was
> determined by Murle Williams who owns a builders support company and has a
> number of aftermarket items for the various Kitfox models.
>
> He had both engine installations handy at the time. He weighed both
systems
> on the same platform scale. On the same day, as I understand. The
weights
> included the engine with all components - fuel system, cooling system,
> engine mount and fluids. Everything except the cowl. The weights are as
> follows.
>
> NSI EA81 304 lbs.
> Rotax 912 UL 169 lbs.
>
> This might look like 200 lbs difference at first glance, but it is not.
>
> Lowell
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Fox5flyer" <morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Engine choices
>
>
> > --> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Fox5flyer"
<morid@northland.lib.mi.us>
> >
> > From: "~~Shorty~~" <shortnaked@golden.net>
> > > Suberu is the heaviest choice of the 582 and 912.
> > > I would take a 912 over a suberu any day until the cost factor came
into
> > the
> > > equasion.
> > > Then if you area die hard that must have a 4 stroke and cost is a
factor
> > > Sure suberu the penalty is extra 200 lbs over a 582 and "possibly "
> less
> > > maintenance
> >
> > Just a couple questions here. Why are you lumping the 582 in with
the
> > 912 and Subaru? Also, I question your 200lb penalty of the 582 over the
> > Subaru. Having both of these packages and weighed both I was very
> surprised
> > to read your numbers. Please give us a credible source for your above
> > information.
> > Also, unfortunately for some of us, the cost factor does come into the
> > equation.
> >
> > > Performance I not sure I have asked several times on this list for
> Numbers
> > > of performance 582 vs Suberu but not read it yet.
> >
> > This is typical apples and oranges Shorty. Why would you want to
> > compare performance of a 582 vs Subaru? What would it tell anybody?
> Would
> > you put a 582 into a S5? To me it's no different than comparing a 582
> with
> > an O200. No comparison because I can't imagine anybody seriously
> > considering choosing between the two. No merit.
> > The 582 is a great engine, but is not meant for the same mission as the
> 0200
> > or Subaru.
> > Deke
> >
> >
> > BEGIN-ANTISPAM-VOTING-LINKS
> > ------------------------------------------------------
> > Teach CanIt if this mail (ID 77143481) is spam:
> > Spam:
> http://login.safereach.com/b.php?c=s&i=77143481&m=a15d3d0e1e90
> > Not spam:
> http://login.safereach.com/b.php?c=n&i=77143481&m=a15d3d0e1e90
> > Forget vote:
> http://login.safereach.com/b.php?c=f&i=77143481&m=a15d3d0e1e90
> > ------------------------------------------------------
> > END-ANTISPAM-VOTING-LINKS
> >
> >
>
>
Message 21
| 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: Engine choices |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Clint Bazzill" <clint_bazzill@hotmail.com>
Does the weight of the EA81 include the Batteries. They are heavy compared
to a 912ULS 14AH at 14 lbs which I have used for 700 hours. Clint
Message 22
| 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: model IV wing tanks |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: AlbertaIV@aol.com
In a message dated 1/11/05 8:57:22 AM Pacific Standard Time, lynnmatt@jps.net
writes:
<<
Maybe somebody needs to come up with a seal that would prevent fuel
from getting into the flaperon....sort of like maybe a piece of >>
First off, I don't recall a single case (9+ years now) where gasoline has
entered the flapperons and caused any damage. Just maybe, there is no problem
in
this area??
Don Smythe
N-998DS Classic IV W/ 582
Message 23
| 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: FYI....Couple of Canadian Kitfoxes for sale |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "~~Shorty~~" <shortnaked@golden.net>
Gary,
thanks for that ,, nice looking KF'es
Shorty
----- Original Message -----
From: "kitfoxjunky" <kitfoxjunky@decisionlabs.com>
Subject: Kitfox-List: FYI....Couple of Canadian Kitfoxes for sale
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kitfoxjunky
<kitfoxjunky@decisionlabs.com>
>
> I recently bought an exhaust system for my 912S from a guy near Toronto.
> He has a KF III for sale, finished thru silver. I put his pictures onto a
> web page as a way of saying thanks for helping me on the exhaust. He has
> wingtips, several Soob engines, and other bits and pieces if anyone is
> interested. Jim Oke is his name. Used to be on the list years ago. Nice
> guy to deal with. Mention my name if you buy something. He said there was
> a steak and beer in it for me. :-)
>
> http://www.decisionlabs.com/oke
>
> I also ran across a Kitfox II for sale, again here in Canada close to
> Toronto. Check it out if you are interested. It is listed under single
> engine aircraft. $ 26,500 Canadian. Rotax 582 bluehead engine.
>
> http://www.aircraftsales.ca/showplane.php
>
> Gary Walsh
> C-GOOT
> www.decisionlabs.com/kitfox
>
>
Message 24
| 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: model IV wing tanks |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
I just got to thinking about this because I read on this forum just a
few days ago about someone's flaperons having their foam eroded away by
the ingestion of fuel....didn't I? And of course, if it WAS just one
incident, I'd say yes, we have no problem in this area.
Lynn
do not archive
On Tuesday, January 11, 2005, at 06:33 PM, AlbertaIV@aol.com wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: AlbertaIV@aol.com
>
> In a message dated 1/11/05 8:57:22 AM Pacific Standard Time,
> lynnmatt@jps.net
> writes:
>
> <<
> Maybe somebody needs to come up with a seal that would prevent fuel
> from getting into the flaperon....sort of like maybe a piece of >>
>
> First off, I don't recall a single case (9+ years now) where gasoline
> has
> entered the flapperons and caused any damage. Just maybe, there is no
> problem in
> this area??
>
> Don Smythe
> N-998DS Classic IV W/ 582
>
>
Message 25
| 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: cutting exhaust pipe |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Torgeir Mortensen <torgemor@online.no>
Hi Kurt and all,
-And a happy new year..
Been reading this one with interest, esp. those comments.
Well, as usually, Kurt is ABSOLUTELY right about the thrust from the
exhaust system.
Let's look at the very known engine, a Lycoming IO 360 (the one most
people know ??), -would you believe that this engine can add up to approx.
"20 LBS" in additional thrust from the exhaust??
This thrust gain is "significant" at cruise altitude.
OK., I'm not going to do any calculation here, but will refer to Cafe
Foundation, this is a "scientific group" making "aircraft performance
reports". This group Sponsored and Funded by the EAA (Experimental
Aircraft Association) and the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration).
Here is two documents related to this topic. The first one is The EPG
(exhaust pressure graph) and Aircraft Exhaust Systems.
If you go to this site, the document start downloading (pdf format) if you
click on the link:
http://www.cafefoundation.org/aprs/epg.pdf
This second report has actual data from an IO-360, the document start
downloading (pdf format) if you click on the link:
http://www.cafefoundation.org/aprs/EPG%20PART%20IV.pdf
Regards,
Torgeir.
On Sun, 2 Jan 2005 11:45:17 -0800 (PST), kurt schrader
<smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com> wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader
> <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
>
> Hi Don,
>
> I cut mine at the 45 degree angle too. The upper side
> is shorter on mine. I think it allows the exhaust
> pulse to release and expand a little more gradually
> reducing noise slightly over a straight cut. I am not
> sure if there really is another benefit from tip
> cutting, in spite of some claims. You have to
> consider what it does to the airflow around the
> fuselage and not just the exhaust flow.
>
> The bigger effect is to have the exhaust point down at
> 45 degrees. I read where as much as 10% of your
> thrust can come from the exhaust "jet". Pointed
> straight aft, you get 100% of it as thrust. Pointed
> straight down, you get 100% of it as lift.
>
> Whatever the jet benefit, due to the benefits of
> geometry, you get not 100%, but 141.4% of the
> thrust/lift benefit at that 45 degree angle. You get
> ~71% thrust and ~71% lift when at 45 degrees.
>
> Say mine was quite a small jet thrust in cruise - 10
> lbs due to my turbo reducing exhaust energy. At the
> 45, I still get 7.1 lbs of thrust and 7.1 lbs of added
> lift. Four pounds gained just by an angle? Easier
> than reducing 4 lbs of weight...
>
> Though mine is not quite 45 degrees, whatever the
> gain, I'll take it.
>
> Kurt S. S-5/NSI turbo
>
> --- AlbertaIV@aol.com wrote:
>
>> I seem to remember once about cutting the tail end
>> of the exhaust pipe at a 45 degree angle on the
>> backside of the airflow. This was either to reduce
>> drag or help promote good exhaust flow as it exits
>> (or both). Does anyone have any thoughts on this?
>> I had to weld a short extension on my exhaust pipe
>> and right now it is cut square.
>>
>> Don Smythe
>> N-998DS Classic IV W/ 582
>
>
> __________________________________
> Dress up your holiday email, Hollywood style. Learn more.
> http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com
>
>
--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Message 26
| 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: | Cafe Foundation. |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Torgeir Mortensen <torgemor@online.no>
Hi Folks,
Thought I'll add some more info about the Cafe Foundation. They test
experimental aircrafts and various systems / Principe for aircrafts.
Sorry, the Kitfox models is not tested (yet ? ).
They have a very interesting (in fact three) reports about vortex
generators, the thing few tell about - a more complete cleanup of an
aircraft -yes "local airflow" and the other methods.
There is also reports about traditional (magneto) ignition system vs.
modern electronic ignition system.
Another one is about fuel handling and safety issues, very valuable...
Here is yet another one, towing a 152 (Aerobat), in order to find the real
glide number for this aircraft.
And the last one about wax "effect" on the aircraft vs. drag.
Youll find them here:
http://www.cafefoundation.org/
Enjoy,
Torgeir.
--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Message 27
| 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: | model IV wing tanks |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Steve Zakreski <szakreski@shaw.ca>
Lynn
Yep, I recall the thread a few months ago where the foam was eaten away.
But it's the only case I can recall of this problem being brought up on this
list. But then...you're the builder. That's the fun. It would indeed be
nice to seal the flapperon gap if for no other reason than to stop the rain
from going in there and freezing. I made many mods which were important to
me and nobody else.
1) I modified the door latch so it could be opened by someone trying to
rescue me.
2) Added a water bottle holder on the door so the bottle wouldn't roll
around on the floor and jam the pedals. My mouth was constantly dry during
the first year of nervous flying.
3) Removed the gascolator because I considered it to increase risk rather
than decrease.
4) LOTS of fail-safe wiring considerations.
5) Fuel flow monitoring device (essential IMHO if you will be doing long
distance cruising)
I used to (and still do) read every accident report I could lay my hands on
and see if there was anything I could build into my Kitfox to avoid the same
thing happening to me.
SteveZ
Calgary
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Lynn
Matteson
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: model IV wing tanks
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
I just got to thinking about this because I read on this forum just a
few days ago about someone's flaperons having their foam eroded away by
the ingestion of fuel....didn't I? And of course, if it WAS just one
incident, I'd say yes, we have no problem in this area.
Lynn
do not archive
On Tuesday, January 11, 2005, at 06:33 PM, AlbertaIV@aol.com wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: AlbertaIV@aol.com
>
> In a message dated 1/11/05 8:57:22 AM Pacific Standard Time,
> lynnmatt@jps.net
> writes:
>
> <<
> Maybe somebody needs to come up with a seal that would prevent fuel
> from getting into the flaperon....sort of like maybe a piece of >>
>
> First off, I don't recall a single case (9+ years now) where gasoline
> has
> entered the flapperons and caused any damage. Just maybe, there is no
> problem in
> this area??
>
> Don Smythe
> N-998DS Classic IV W/ 582
>
>
Message 28
| 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: model IV wing tanks |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Jerry Liles <wliles@bayou.com>
I've seen fuel get in the flapperon once. A friend had a Kitfox Model
IV (not JR this time) that was overfilled with fuel flowing off the back
of the wing onto the flapperons with fuel entering the slot. It took a
couple of days before it all evaporated. It did no harm we could see
but fuel vapors in the closed space has to be a significant fire
hazard. We did not take them apart to inspect the foam ribs. This
particular Fox did not have vent holes drilled in the flapperons when
constructed and had the flapperons fill with water when it was washed
the first time. Finally had to take them off to drain and then drill
drain holes. The original Dean Wilson design with two fingers from the
flapperon bearing to the rib had a rather large well that exposed the
bearing. It wasn't pretty but the well could be sealed with epoxy and
the bearing could easily be inspected, cleaned and lubed as necessary
and the interior of the flapperon stayed dry. Take your choice; Pretty
or functional.
Jerry Liles
AlbertaIV@aol.com wrote:
>--> Kitfox-List message posted by: AlbertaIV@aol.com
>
>In a message dated 1/11/05 8:57:22 AM Pacific Standard Time, lynnmatt@jps.net
>writes:
>
><<
> Maybe somebody needs to come up with a seal that would prevent fuel
> from getting into the flaperon....sort of like maybe a piece of >>
>
>First off, I don't recall a single case (9+ years now) where gasoline has
>entered the flapperons and caused any damage. Just maybe, there is no problem
in
>this area??
>
>Don Smythe
>N-998DS Classic IV W/ 582
>
>
>
>
Message 29
| 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: Engine choices |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: <Lonnie_D._Tillinghast@oxy.com>
Anyone perfectly happy with what they have and simply flying for the fun
of it???
Message 30
| 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: Engine choices |
Seal-Send-Time: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 21:17:11 -0700
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Dee Young" <henrysfork1@msn.com>
Yup
----- Original Message -----
From: Lonnie_D._Tillinghast@oxy.com<mailto:Lonnie_D._Tillinghast@oxy.com>
To: Kitfox-List@matronics.com<mailto:Kitfox-List@matronics.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2005 9:00 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Engine choices
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: <Lonnie_D._Tillinghast@oxy.com<mailto:Lonnie_D._Tillinghast@oxy.com>>
Anyone perfectly happy with what they have and simply flying for the fun
of it???
Message 31
| 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: Engine choices |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Steve Zakreski <szakreski@shaw.ca>
Refer to the picture of me over the mountains I posted two weeks ago. ;-)
SteveZ
Calgary
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of
Lonnie_D._Tillinghast@oxy.com
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Engine choices
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: <Lonnie_D._Tillinghast@oxy.com>
Anyone perfectly happy with what they have and simply flying for the fun
of it???
Message 32
| 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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Steve Zakreski <szakreski@shaw.ca>
Speaking of photos. Don/Deke...how about setting up a folder in the Kitfox
Sportflight Photo site for pictures of our list members. I would love to
see what the bumpkins I've been listing to for 8 years really look like.
Incidentally, I find posting photos on this site to be hit and miss. I get
a lot of upload failures. Are there any tricks I should know about?
SteveZ
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Steve
Zakreski
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Engine choices
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Steve Zakreski <szakreski@shaw.ca>
Refer to the picture of me over the mountains I posted two weeks ago. ;-)
SteveZ
Calgary
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of
Lonnie_D._Tillinghast@oxy.com
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Engine choices
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: <Lonnie_D._Tillinghast@oxy.com>
Anyone perfectly happy with what they have and simply flying for the fun
of it???
Message 33
| 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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rex & Jan Shaw" <rexjan@bigpond.com>
> I have a vertical card compass in my dash that has been working just great
since 2001. The "trick" was to use the extra strength balancing balls
(special order from the compass manufacturer).
I too want a vertical card compass one day. I read a good write up somewhere
on the net and it agreed exactly with what you are saying. So I feel anyone
that has been put off by reports of vertical card compasses not working need
not be. Sure as this article said the firm would not instal them as they
just didn't usually work. However they nutted it out after a while and came
to the conclusion about those balls you mention and they now say they are
great.
Rex.
rexjan@bigpond.com
Message 34
| 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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Rex & Jan Shaw" <rexjan@bigpond.com>
I don't know about a better cap, but a couple of years back a list member
bought a bunch or Mercedes Benz gas caps that he made available to fellow
listers for a small fee. They work great.
Guys the Mercedes Fuel cap gasket is P/N 140-471-00-79 Also under
E2060-124896 It is listed as a hard seal 58x37.5x2.5. Costs about $2 I
could not seem to buy just the gasket in Australia. Would have had to get
the whole cap. However look on the net. Just put the part No in your chosen
search engine and it will come up in a few places in USA. I finished up
using 3mm fuel grade insertion rubber and made my own. I was getting
problems because I fill to the top but now I don't leak a drop.
Rex.
rexjan@bigpond.com
Message 35
| 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 |
|
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: "Don Pearsall" <donpearsall@comcast.net>
Steve,
I have found that when the photo posting fails, it is most likely due to a
name that the web server does not like, or a huge sized photo.
Try to avoid putting non-letter/number characters in the photo name. If
there are spaces, @, &, and other odd characters, the web code cannot locate
the photo.
Don
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Steve Zakreski
Subject: Kitfox-List: Post Photos
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Steve Zakreski <szakreski@shaw.ca>
Speaking of photos. Don/Deke...how about setting up a folder in the Kitfox
Sportflight Photo site for pictures of our list members. I would love to
see what the bumpkins I've been listing to for 8 years really look like.
Incidentally, I find posting photos on this site to be hit and miss. I get
a lot of upload failures. Are there any tricks I should know about?
SteveZ
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Steve
Zakreski
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Engine choices
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Steve Zakreski <szakreski@shaw.ca>
Refer to the picture of me over the mountains I posted two weeks ago. ;-)
SteveZ
Calgary
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of
Lonnie_D._Tillinghast@oxy.com
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Engine choices
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: <Lonnie_D._Tillinghast@oxy.com>
Anyone perfectly happy with what they have and simply flying for the fun
of it???
Message 36
| 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: Model 5, Subaru and Batterry |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Hi Trey,
The problem comes with leverage. You can put a 20 lb
battery in the tail or twice the weight half the
distance back. The further back you put the balance
weight, the lighter your plane will be.
I put my main battery in the tail and my ELT behind
that. My second (4 lb) battery is on the cockpit side
of the firewall. I used its placement for my fine CG
adjusting at the very end. I have no dead weights to
deal with this way.
Some worry about spins with weights that far out.
Again, I think half the weight at twice the distance
should spin the same. No matter how you do it, you
have to balance the plane.
Peter G is the only one I know with an S-5 and the
battery more forward. You can ask him about it.
Kurt S. S-5/NSI turbo
--- Trey Moran <ffmoran@centurytel.net> wrote:
> Question for Model 5 builders or flyers with Subaru
> EA81 engines, preferably with a Stratus, but will
> take info on NSI. I don't like the idea of putting
> the battery in the tail and was hoping someone has
> put the battery more forward and can provide cg
> info. It would also be helpful to have cg numbers,
> including weight and arm for the battery, for a
> plane with the forward swept wing so I could do some
> what if cg calculations.
>
> Trey Moran
__________________________________
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
Message 37
| 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: model IV wing tanks |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
What if we skinned the cat the other way? Attach a
thin clear plastic cover to the flapperon bearing horn
so it can rotate, and let it slide on the flapperon
over the slot.
Just thinking out loud...
Kurt S.
--- Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net> wrote:
> --> Kitfox-List message posted by: Lynn Matteson
> <lynnmatt@jps.net>
>
> I just got to thinking about this because I read on
> this forum just a
> few days ago about someone's flaperons having their
> foam eroded away by
> the ingestion of fuel....didn't I? And of course, if
> it WAS just one
> incident, I'd say yes, we have no problem in this
> area.
>
> Lynn
> do not archive
__________________________________
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
Message 38
| 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: Engine choices |
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Soobs aren't that bad. They are a viable engine
choice, if you have the mission to match. I can't see
300 lbs as right for the weight.
Like Deke, I also weighed almost everything I put on
my plane, a Series 5. In this case, I installed the
NSI turbo Soob and came up with a weight of 234 lbs
installed. The turbo is usually a little heavier than
that, but I found a few pounds to shave, and it came
out nearer the non-turbo weight.
Two of us installed the engine by hand including
having one hand free to install the bolts. Neither of
us are weight lifters. I doubt very much that we
could have installed a 300 lb engine that way.
As for batteries, I installed much more battery than
it required. My origional battery was a "used up",
turned in battery core that I used for all ground
testing. It cost me $3, but started the engine every
time and did all my avionics testing. The smallest
battery I would want to use though is an 18 lb
battery, since the engine has no mags. The good news
is that the turbo engine is low compression and turns
over easily. Maybe easier then the high compression
Rotax?
For performance, I claim an 800 lb useful load on
wheels that I can climb at 750'/min and cruise at 98
mph. I hope for more performance as I add the
fairings yet to be tested. And I can load up the
baggage compartment to 135 lbs without going out of
CG. 150 lbs if I am careful.
Of course it will climb much better at light weights.
Overall, I can cruise quietly at 3200 rpm doing the
missions I want to and not worry about high
repair/rebuild costs. If I am on floats, I can use
boat dock gas. And most of all, I've got 140 hp at
12,000', so short field T/O's with a load are doable
out of mountain strips or lakes. That was my intended
mission.
Kurt S. S-5/NSI turbo
--- Fox5flyer <morid@northland.lib.mi.us> wrote:
> The exact weight for the NSI EA81 with everything
> including radiator, radiator hoses, cables, motor
> mount, tanks, etc is 232 lbs. This isn't
> heresay. I weighed it myself just so I would know
> for sure. It appears that either somebody's scale
> is off by a whole bunch or the numbers got
> mixed up. Another year and the NSI will be over 400
> pounds.
> Deke
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! --
|