Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:29 AM - Re: Re: SELLING PLANE (Charlie)
2. 04:27 AM - Re: Re: Nose gear parts (Bradley M Webb)
3. 04:31 AM - Re: Re: Nose gear parts (Bradley M Webb)
4. 05:14 AM - Re: Best prop was: Fuel consumption based on gallons per hour (fox5flyer)
5. 05:42 AM - Re: Best prop was: Fuel consumption based on gallons per hour (Bob)
6. 05:43 AM - Re: Best prop was: Fuel consumption based on gallons per hour (DEAN TINAGLIA)
7. 06:45 AM - Re: Re: Nose gear parts (flier)
8. 07:39 AM - Re: Best prop was: Fuel consumption based on gallons per hour (Lowell Fitt)
9. 07:57 AM - Re: Re: Nose gear parts (Lowell Fitt)
10. 08:17 AM - Re: Kitfox website FAQ (dcsfoto)
11. 08:20 AM - Re: Re: Best prop was: Fuel consumption based on gallons per hour (Randy Daughenbaugh)
12. 08:31 AM - Re: Re: Nose gear parts (Lowell Fitt)
13. 08:56 AM - Re: Re: Nose gear parts (flier)
14. 09:01 AM - Re: Re: Best prop was: Fuel consumption based on gallons per hour (Noel Loveys)
15. 11:19 AM - Re: Re: Nose gear parts (Bradley M Webb)
16. 11:50 AM - Re: Re: plane sale (Charlie)
17. 11:51 AM - Re: Re: SELLING PLANE (Charlie)
18. 11:51 AM - Re: Re: SELLING PLANE (Charlie)
19. 04:01 PM - Re: selling plane (Bradley Johnston)
20. 06:28 PM - Airport access update, I got a key (Tom Jones)
21. 09:44 PM - Re: Source code in posts - Off topic (Larry/Cathy Boone)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: SELLING PLANE |
thanks for your reply, I have decided to make the plane available to a
flying club hoping several people will benefit from it.
am keeping all replays on file in case this falls through
could not move it now because of the snow piles
Have a good day Charlie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kem Dunnebacke" <jboatm16@netzero.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 5:12 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: SELLING PLANE
>
> Morning Charlie, i tried to reach you by email a couple of times early on
> but no response,so maybe here will help? i have cleared this weekend to
> make the trip up your way if you want? my email is kitfoxivplay@gmail.com
> thanks kem
>
> --------
> kitfox IV PLAY Speedster H-30
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=102265#102265
>
>
>
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: Nose gear parts |
Well, you're entitled to your opinion, of course. But that's a pretty vague
statement.
My G10 is running superbly. Smooth, 2gph, and good power. Like the Subie,
many hours on many planes...few problems.
Run what you like, but he asked for options to the Rotax.
I'm not sure of the Classic IV, but if the airframe can handle the weight,
and the money doesn't scare you, look at the Continental O-200. It is heavy,
but they are really nice motors. I'd go that way if building a 'fox with a
higher MTOW.
Bradley
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-
>server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Thompson
>Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 11:53 PM
>To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Nose gear parts
>
>
>I wouldnt run a Geo,or a Suburu on any
>aircraft..............................,ben there done
>that............................!
>
>
>> [Original Message]
>> From: Bradley M Webb <bmwebb@cox.net>
>> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>> Date: 3/22/2007 6:46:28 PM
>> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Nose gear parts
>>
>>
>> Don't forget the Geo 1.0L G10. Equivalent to the Rotax in power, and
>several
>> distinct advantages over the two strokes.
>>
>> Bradley
>>
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-
>> >server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Guy Buchanan
>> >Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 11:15 AM
>> >To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
>> >Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Nose gear parts
>> >
>> >
>> >At 06:32 AM 3/22/2007, you wrote:
>> >>>Thanks , I checked with Kitfox and the parts are pretty pricey new,
>> >>>what other engines are availible, I just don't like Rotax.
>> >
>> >Don't like Rotax, eh? Well, there's the Rotec radial, for that
>> >Stearman look. (http://www.rotecradialengines.com/) There's the HKS
>> >opposed twin, a replacement for the 582. (www.hpower-ltd.com, and
>> >http://www.greenskyadventures.com/ pushes these heavily.) Then
>> >there's Jabiru, of course, with two air cooled engines, 85 and 120
>> >hp, highly recommended by several on this list. (I know Michel likes
>> >his Jabiru.) A quick check of the Jabiru web site,
>> >http://www.jabiru.net.au/, shows installation packages for Kitfoxes
>> >1-4 for the 85 hp engine and for Kitfoxes 4 & 5 for the 120 hp
>> >engine. (Be careful of their horsepower claims, Jabiru markets the 85
>> >as a replacement for the 65 hp Rotax 582, and the 120 as a
>> >replacement for 100-120 hp engines. I don't know why. As I said there
>> >is good information on their relative performance in the archives and
>> >on this list.)
>> >
>> >
>> >Guy Buchanan
>> >K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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: Nose gear parts |
Oh come on, Lowell. He doesn't like them for the same reason many others of
us don't. Too noisy, too much vibration, outrageous prices (for what they
are), too many rebuilds, sudden stoppages...the list goes on and on.
You've heard it all before...
Bradley
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-
>server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lowell Fitt
>Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 12:23 PM
>To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Nose gear parts
>
>
>Jerry,
>
>I would be interested in your reasons for not liking Rotax.
>
>Lowell
>do not archive
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Jerry Saar" <chalengr@interl.net>
>To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 5:32 AM
>Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Nose gear parts
>
>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Michael Gibbs" <MichaelGibbs@cox.net>
>> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 2:48 AM
>> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Nose gear parts
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Jerry sez:
>>>
>>>>I am thinking about buying a unfinished classic 4 and would like to make
>>>>it a trigear, would anyone know where there is nose gear parts and also
>>>>engine mount parts for a lycoming.
>>>
>>> Nose wheel parts should be available from Kitfox, LLC:
>>> <http://www.kitfoxaircraft.com>. Before you make the purchase, you
>>> should run some weight and balance numbers and consider the weight of
>>> that engine. You may find that you won't have much useful load left
>>> unless you go with a lighter engine.
>>>
>>> Mike G.
>>> N728KF
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 7:52 AM
>>>
>>>Thanks , I checked with Kitfox and the parts are pretty pricey new, what
>>>other engines are availible, I just don't like Rotax.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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: Best prop was: Fuel consumption based on gallons |
per hour
Great report Randy. It's good to see hard data to help us all make
future decisions. OK, no more questions from me until your testing is
complete!
Good luck.
Deke
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: Randy Daughenbaugh
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 9:07 PM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Best prop was: Fuel consumption based on
gallons per hour
Geeze, you are going to wheedle all the details out of me before I get
done testing.
OK. Plane is series 5 with Series 7 firewall forward. Grove gear and
big tires. 776 lb empty. Engine is 912S. Old prop is 70" Powerfin
"F", 3 blade. It was 72" but the factory cut 1" off each blade for me
to make it faster. Cutting off the 1" did make it faster. But not
enough.
I tried a friend's Warpdrive and Wow! His was a straight tip. I
immediately ordered a taper tip 70" 3 blade warpdrive. New airplane! I
am still playing with pitch so some numbers are fuzzy..
I used to think that with a ground adjustable prop, you just set the
pitch to what you want - cruise or good take off and climb. But it is
far from that simple.
I will try a table.
Prop Pitched for: Static rpm Airspeed at 5500 rpm
Indicated airspeed at redline (5800 rpm
72" PF reasonable t/o 5200 80 mph
85 mph
72" PF very slow t/o 4800 88 mph
95 mph
70" PF Reasonable t/o 5200 86 mph
92 mph
70" PF Very slow t/o 4900 94 mph
100 mph
70" WD reasonable t/o 5300 106 mph
115 mph
70" WD very slow t/o 5000 118 mph
Can't get there!
My plane has big tires but with wide open throttle and lots of pitch
the warp drive gets me something on the order of 122 mph indicated.
About 130 on the GPS. And I can't over rev the engine in level flight.
So there! If there is error in the numbers (beyond my normal errors
that is), it is you fault for not letting me finish testing. But it is
a new plane with the Warpdrive prop. Getting off the ground without a
Cessna like ground role is important to me so I will probably settle on
a 5500 rpm cruise of about 108 - 110.
Randy
.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of fox5flyer
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 3:29 PM
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Best prop was: Fuel consumption based on
gallons per hour
OK now, no secrets my friend. What is that prop that you're
experimenting with and what was the one you were using previously?
Deke
----- Original Message -----
From: Randy Daughenbaugh
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 10:42 AM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Fuel consumption based on gallons per hour
Deke,
Cruise speed was about 94-96 indicated. The prop I had didn't allow
me to put very much pitch in and still get off the ground in a
reasonable distance so I was only able to use a little bit of throttle
or I would over-rev the engine. I hope to report soon on my performance
with the new prop, ( I am still experimenting with pitch.) but it has
added easily 10 mph to my cruise speed and gets me off the ground very
quickly. It is like a different plane.
Cruise now is with the throttle much further in, so I think I am
burning more fuel, but still it has been in the 3 - 3.5 gal/hr range in
my playing around and going to area fly-ins. The 912S is an amazing
engine - especially compared to the lycosaurous engines some of my
friends are flying behind.
Randy
.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of fox5flyer
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 9:32 PM
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Subject: Kitfox-List: Fuel consumption based on gallons per hour
That's some great fuel economy Randy. What sort of average cruise
speeds were you getting for the trip?
Deke
----- Original Message -----
From: Randy Daughenbaugh
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 8:58 PM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Mielage: Fuel consumption based on
gallons per hour
I will throw out one data point for a series 5 with series 7
firewall forward and 912S.
From Rapid City, South Dakota to just past the other side of South
Dakota - Sioux Center Iowa. 390 miles, 430 miles on I-90, about 4.3
hours on clock, one stop, 13 gal premium car gas 30 miles per gallon.
I now have a better prop and am quite a bit faster and burning
more like 3.3 gal/hr.
Randy
.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of L
Klingmuller
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 2:10 PM
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Subject: Kitfox-List: Mielage: Fuel consumption based on gallons
per hour
The subject of fuel consumtion has so many variables: speed,
engine, altitude, airplane, weight, inclusion/exclusions, averages,
etc, etc
Now here is a chanllange for those who have been flying some
longer x-country flights and have computed AVERAGE trip milages.
What is your average MILAGE e. g. st miles/gal or n miles/gal??
Here some recent data for an RV-6A based on total gl used for the
total GPS milage flown from Denver / Tucson / southern Calf/
Albuquerque/Denver (includes one hour of sight seeing and all taxiing
etc)
Total GPS milage: 2000 nml
Total fuel: 102 gl
Average milage: 22.5 gl/st ml
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matron
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matron
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matron
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
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: Best prop was: Fuel consumption based on gallons per |
hour
Hi Randy -
I'm building an early 5 and it looks like you've done what I'm trying to get to.
Great job on keeping the weight down! Being an engineer, I really appreciate
the data and hope that you don't mind my plotting it. That really IS a huge
difference between props!
Bob
--------
Remember that internet advice may only be worth what you pay.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=102458#102458
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/daughenbaugh_speeds_829.jpg
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: Best prop was: Fuel consumption based on gallons |
per hour
You don't know how helpful you have been, all this prop stuff in the
ads doesn't mean much to me w/o figures like yours, ...so Ill bet you
have done some gallons/per hr checks also, ...I'll bet none were over
51/2 per hr, ...right...thks Dean
----- Original Message -----
From: Randy Daughenbaugh<mailto:rjdaugh@rapidnet.com>
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com<mailto:kitfox-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 7:07 PM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Best prop was: Fuel consumption based on
gallons per hour
Geeze, you are going to wheedle all the details out of me before I get
done testing.
OK. Plane is series 5 with Series 7 firewall forward. Grove gear and
big tires. 776 lb empty. Engine is 912S. Old prop is 70" Powerfin
"F", 3 blade. It was 72" but the factory cut 1" off each blade for me
to make it faster. Cutting off the 1" did make it faster. But not
enough.
I tried a friend's Warpdrive and Wow! His was a straight tip. I
immediately ordered a taper tip 70" 3 blade warpdrive. New airplane! I
am still playing with pitch so some numbers are fuzzy..
I used to think that with a ground adjustable prop, you just set the
pitch to what you want - cruise or good take off and climb. But it is
far from that simple.
I will try a table.
Prop Pitched for: Static rpm Airspeed at 5500 rpm
Indicated airspeed at redline (5800 rpm
72" PF reasonable t/o 5200 80 mph
85 mph
72" PF very slow t/o 4800 88 mph
95 mph
70" PF Reasonable t/o 5200 86 mph
92 mph
70" PF Very slow t/o 4900 94 mph
100 mph
70" WD reasonable t/o 5300 106 mph
115 mph
70" WD very slow t/o 5000 118 mph
Can't get there!
My plane has big tires but with wide open throttle and lots of pitch
the warp drive gets me something on the order of 122 mph indicated.
About 130 on the GPS. And I can't over rev the engine in level flight.
So there! If there is error in the numbers (beyond my normal errors
that is), it is you fault for not letting me finish testing. But it is
a new plane with the Warpdrive prop. Getting off the ground without a
Cessna like ground role is important to me so I will probably settle on
a 5500 rpm cruise of about 108 - 110.
Randy
.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of fox5flyer
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 3:29 PM
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Best prop was: Fuel consumption based on
gallons per hour
OK now, no secrets my friend. What is that prop that you're
experimenting with and what was the one you were using previously?
Deke
----- Original Message -----
From: Randy Daughenbaugh<mailto:rjdaugh@rapidnet.com>
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com<mailto:kitfox-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 10:42 AM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Fuel consumption based on gallons per hour
Deke,
Cruise speed was about 94-96 indicated. The prop I had didn't allow
me to put very much pitch in and still get off the ground in a
reasonable distance so I was only able to use a little bit of throttle
or I would over-rev the engine. I hope to report soon on my performance
with the new prop, ( I am still experimenting with pitch.) but it has
added easily 10 mph to my cruise speed and gets me off the ground very
quickly. It is like a different plane.
Cruise now is with the throttle much further in, so I think I am
burning more fuel, but still it has been in the 3 - 3.5 gal/hr range in
my playing around and going to area fly-ins. The 912S is an amazing
engine - especially compared to the lycosaurous engines some of my
friends are flying behind.
Randy
.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of fox5flyer
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 9:32 PM
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Subject: Kitfox-List: Fuel consumption based on gallons per hour
That's some great fuel economy Randy. What sort of average cruise
speeds were you getting for the trip?
Deke
----- Original Message -----
From: Randy Daughenbaugh<mailto:rjdaugh@rapidnet.com>
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com<mailto:kitfox-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 8:58 PM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Mielage: Fuel consumption based on
gallons per hour
I will throw out one data point for a series 5 with series 7
firewall forward and 912S.
From Rapid City, South Dakota to just past the other side of South
Dakota - Sioux Center Iowa. 390 miles, 430 miles on I-90, about 4.3
hours on clock, one stop, 13 gal premium car gas 30 miles per gallon.
I now have a better prop and am quite a bit faster and burning
more like 3.3 gal/hr.
Randy
.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of L
Klingmuller
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 2:10 PM
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Subject: Kitfox-List: Mielage: Fuel consumption based on gallons
per hour
The subject of fuel consumtion has so many variables: speed,
engine, altitude, airplane, weight, inclusion/exclusions, averages,
etc, etc
Now here is a chanllange for those who have been flying some
longer x-country flights and have computed AVERAGE trip milages.
What is your average MILAGE e. g. st miles/gal or n miles/gal??
Here some recent data for an RV-6A based on total gl used for the
total GPS milage flown from Denver / Tucson / southern Calf/
Albuquerque/Denver (includes one hour of sight seeing and all taxiing
etc)
Total GPS milage: 2000 nml
Total fuel: 102 gl
Average milage: 22.5 gl/st ml
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matron
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matron
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matron
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List<http://www.matronics.com/N
avigator?Kitfox-List>
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: Nose gear parts |
Mark,
I have to disagree as your statement is way too broad.
I have a 912 on my 'Fox but I run a Sube on my
Nieuport and I couldn't ask for a better engine for
that plane.
Apparently you either had poor setups or bad
engines. A great engine selected (or poorly setup)
for the wrong application will yield poor results.
Regards,
Ted
--- Original Message ---
From: "Mark Thompson" <kr2@earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Nose gear parts
<kr2@earthlink.net>
>
>I wouldnt run a Geo,or a Suburu on any
>aircraft..............................,ben there done
>that............................!
>
>
>> [Original Message]
>> From: Bradley M Webb <bmwebb@cox.net>
>> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>> Date: 3/22/2007 6:46:28 PM
>> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Nose gear parts
>>
Webb" <bmwebb@cox.net>
>>
>> Don't forget the Geo 1.0L G10. Equivalent to the
Rotax in power, and
>several
>> distinct advantages over the two strokes.
>>
>> Bradley
>>
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-
>> >server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Guy Buchanan
>> >Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 11:15 AM
>> >To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
>> >Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Nose gear parts
>> >
<bnn@nethere.com>
>> >
>> >At 06:32 AM 3/22/2007, you wrote:
>> >>>Thanks , I checked with Kitfox and the parts
are pretty pricey new,
>> >>>what other engines are availible, I just don't
like Rotax.
>> >
>> >Don't like Rotax, eh? Well, there's the Rotec
radial, for that
>> >Stearman look.
(http://www.rotecradialengines.com/) There's the HKS
>> >opposed twin, a replacement for the 582.
(www.hpower-ltd.com, and
>> >http://www.greenskyadventures.com/ pushes these
heavily.) Then
>> >there's Jabiru, of course, with two air cooled
engines, 85 and 120
>> >hp, highly recommended by several on this list.
(I know Michel likes
>> >his Jabiru.) A quick check of the Jabiru web site,
>> >http://www.jabiru.net.au/, shows installation
packages for Kitfoxes
>> >1-4 for the 85 hp engine and for Kitfoxes 4 & 5
for the 120 hp
>> >engine. (Be careful of their horsepower claims,
Jabiru markets the 85
>> >as a replacement for the 65 hp Rotax 582, and the
120 as a
>> >replacement for 100-120 hp engines. I don't know
why. As I said there
>> >is good information on their relative performance
in the archives and
>> >on this list.)
>> >
>> >
>> >Guy Buchanan
>> >K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks
mostly to Bob Ducar.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>_-
=====================================================
=====
browse
Subscriptions page,
FAQ,
List
>_-
=====================================================
=====
Web Forums!
>_-
=====================================================
=====
>
>
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: | Re: Best prop was: Fuel consumption based on gallons |
per hour
Randy,
This is good info. It correlates exactly with the PowerFin performance my
friends had on their Model IVs. Although I flew along side them for
numerous hours our performence data was anecdotal at best. They also did
the 1 inch cut at the ends and it helped a bit as you report. Do you have
climb figures and I am sure the actual prop pitch would be of interest if
you have that.
Lowell
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Randy Daughenbaugh" <rjdaugh@rapidnet.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 6:07 PM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Best prop was: Fuel consumption based on gallons
per hour
> Geeze, you are going to wheedle all the details out of me before I get
> done
> testing.
>
>
> OK. Plane is series 5 with Series 7 firewall forward. Grove gear and big
> tires. 776 lb empty. Engine is 912S. Old prop is 70" Powerfin "F", 3
> blade. It was 72" but the factory cut 1" off each blade for me to make
> it
> faster. Cutting off the 1" did make it faster. But not enough.
>
>
> I tried a friend's Warpdrive and Wow! His was a straight tip. I
> immediately ordered a taper tip 70" 3 blade warpdrive. New airplane! I
> am
> still playing with pitch so some numbers are fuzzy..
>
>
> I used to think that with a ground adjustable prop, you just set the pitch
> to what you want - cruise or good take off and climb. But it is far from
> that simple.
>
>
> I will try a table.
>
>
> Prop Pitched for: Static rpm Airspeed at 5500 rpm Indicated
> airspeed at redline (5800 rpm
>
>
> 72" PF reasonable t/o 5200 80 mph
> 85 mph
>
>
> 72" PF very slow t/o 4800 88 mph
> 95 mph
>
>
> 70" PF Reasonable t/o 5200 86 mph
> 92 mph
>
>
> 70" PF Very slow t/o 4900 94 mph
> 100 mph
>
>
> 70" WD reasonable t/o 5300 106 mph
> 115 mph
>
>
> 70" WD very slow t/o 5000 118 mph
> Can't get there!
>
>
> My plane has big tires but with wide open throttle and lots of pitch the
> warp drive gets me something on the order of 122 mph indicated. About 130
> on the GPS. And I can't over rev the engine in level flight.
>
>
> So there! If there is error in the numbers (beyond my normal errors that
> is), it is you fault for not letting me finish testing. But it is a new
> plane with the Warpdrive prop. Getting off the ground without a Cessna
> like
> ground role is important to me so I will probably settle on a 5500 rpm
> cruise of about 108 - 110.
>
>
> Randy
>
>
> .
>
>
> _____
>
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of fox5flyer
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 3:29 PM
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Best prop was: Fuel consumption based on gallons
> per hour
>
>
> OK now, no secrets my friend. What is that prop that you're experimenting
> with and what was the one you were using previously?
>
> Deke
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: Randy <mailto:rjdaugh@rapidnet.com> Daughenbaugh
>
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 10:42 AM
>
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Fuel consumption based on gallons per hour
>
>
> Deke,
>
> Cruise speed was about 94-96 indicated. The prop I had didn't allow me to
> put very much pitch in and still get off the ground in a reasonable
> distance
> so I was only able to use a little bit of throttle or I would over-rev the
> engine. I hope to report soon on my performance with the new prop, ( I am
> still experimenting with pitch.) but it has added easily 10 mph to my
> cruise speed and gets me off the ground very quickly. It is like a
> different plane.
>
>
> Cruise now is with the throttle much further in, so I think I am burning
> more fuel, but still it has been in the 3 - 3.5 gal/hr range in my playing
> around and going to area fly-ins. The 912S is an amazing engine -
> especially compared to the lycosaurous engines some of my friends are
> flying
> behind.
>
>
> Randy
>
>
> .
>
>
> _____
>
>
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of fox5flyer
> Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 9:32 PM
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Fuel consumption based on gallons per hour
>
>
> That's some great fuel economy Randy. What sort of average cruise speeds
> were you getting for the trip?
>
> Deke
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: Randy <mailto:rjdaugh@rapidnet.com> Daughenbaugh
>
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 8:58 PM
>
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Mielage: Fuel consumption based on gallons per
> hour
>
>
> I will throw out one data point for a series 5 with series 7 firewall
> forward and 912S.
>
>
>>From Rapid City, South Dakota to just past the other side of South
>>Dakota -
> Sioux Center Iowa. 390 miles, 430 miles on I-90, about 4.3 hours on
> clock,
> one stop, 13 gal premium car gas 30 miles per gallon.
>
>
> I now have a better prop and am quite a bit faster and burning more like
> 3.3
> gal/hr.
>
>
> Randy
>
>
> .
>
>
> _____
>
>
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of L Klingmuller
> Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 2:10 PM
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Mielage: Fuel consumption based on gallons per hour
>
>
> The subject of fuel consumtion has so many variables: speed, engine,
> altitude, airplane, weight, inclusion/exclusions, averages, etc, etc
>
>
> Now here is a chanllange for those who have been flying some longer
> x-country flights and have computed AVERAGE trip milages.
>
>
> What is your average MILAGE e. g. st miles/gal or n miles/gal??
>
>
> Here some recent data for an RV-6A based on total gl used for the total
> GPS
> milage flown from Denver / Tucson / southern Calf/ Albuquerque/Denver
> (includes one hour of sight seeing and all taxiing etc)
>
> Total GPS milage: 2000 nml
>
> Total fuel: 102 gl
>
> Average milage: 22.5 gl/st ml
>
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matronhref
> "http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matronhref
> "http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matronhref
> "http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>
>
>
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: Nose gear parts |
Thanks Jerry,
I will offer an opinion. Overpriced? likely true. Short lived? I could
argue that point unless you are referring to the two stroke. I just did a
comprehensive annual condition inspection and the compression was 78, 79,
78, 79 over 80 after 830 hours and I have never used a drop of oil between
oil changes. Lots of folks like the water cooled because there are certain
inflight issues that are a no brainer with water cooling and cooling system
failures are virtually non existant. I have never heard of one. The gear
boxes are noisy, but, of course, that is engineered into it to smooth out
the torsional vibration. You never hear it in flight.
I might encourage you to reconsider Rotax if you are interested in
performance. I doubt at this point there is an engine in it's weight class
that can compete in performance in the Kitfox.
One thing that a Rotax pilot has to overcome or more exactly ignore is the
lawn blower comments. It doesn't bother me as I doubt the Lyconimg and
Continental guys have been to places I have been and flown at the locations
I have flown and landed at some of the places. And for that matter taken
off from places and climbed out without having to find the thermals or
flying the 360s to get over a ridge.
I might suggest, with some prejudice of course, that you can't beat the
Rotax for performance and reliability.
Lowell
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry Saar" <chalengr@interl.net>
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 7:10 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Nose gear parts
>
> I feel the rotax are overpriced , short lived, expensive to overhaul and
> then they are liquid cooled on top of it, and the gearboxes sound like my
> great granpa's threshing machine. there has has to be something better. I
> have built two glasairs with lycomings but they seem too big for a kitfox.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 11:22 AM
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Nose gear parts
>
>
>>
>> Jerry,
>>
>> I would be interested in your reasons for not liking Rotax.
>>
>> Lowell
>> do not archive
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Jerry Saar" <chalengr@interl.net>
>> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 5:32 AM
>> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Nose gear parts
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Michael Gibbs" <MichaelGibbs@cox.net>
>>> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>>> Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 2:48 AM
>>> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Nose gear parts
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Jerry sez:
>>>>
>>>>>I am thinking about buying a unfinished classic 4 and would like to
>>>>>make it a trigear, would anyone know where there is nose gear parts and
>>>>>also engine mount parts for a lycoming.
>>>>
>>>> Nose wheel parts should be available from Kitfox, LLC:
>>>> <http://www.kitfoxaircraft.com>. Before you make the purchase, you
>>>> should run some weight and balance numbers and consider the weight of
>>>> that engine. You may find that you won't have much useful load left
>>>> unless you go with a lighter engine.
>>>>
>>>> Mike G.
>>>> N728KF
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> 7:52 AM
>>>>
>>>>Thanks , I checked with Kitfox and the parts are pretty pricey new, what
>>>>other engines are availible, I just don't like Rotax.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 7:44 AM
>>
>>
>
>
>
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: | Re: Kitfox website FAQ |
bottom line when you finish testing you are required to put the max weight the
aircraft was tested to on your limitations prior to entering phase 2.
that is your max takeoff weight.if it is above 1320 you cannot go back.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=102490#102490
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: | Re: Best prop was: Fuel consumption based on gallons |
per hour
Thanks for the plot Bob. The points that don't look consistent are the ones
that I was wanting to repeat.
It IS a big difference between props. I am really much happier with my
plane now. It doesn't mean that the Powerfin is a bad prop, it just means
it is not the right prop for this application. I have trouble thinking of
my plane as a "fast" plane, but the Warp prop is better for this plane and
this engine.
Randy - 70" Powerfin "F" prop for sale
.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 6:42 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Best prop was: Fuel consumption based on gallons
per hour
Hi Randy -
I'm building an early 5 and it looks like you've done what I'm trying to get
to. Great job on keeping the weight down! Being an engineer, I really
appreciate the data and hope that you don't mind my plotting it. That
really IS a huge difference between props!
Bob
--------
Remember that internet advice may only be worth what you pay.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=102458#102458
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/daughenbaugh_speeds_829.jpg
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: | Re: Nose gear parts |
Bradley,
If I might, I would like an answer from Jerry which incidentally came this
morning. But too noisy? - you gotta be kidding. I live in a residential
airpark and get tons of comments on my quiet engine and this from folks that
are immersed in aviation. Vibration? - kidding again. Outrageous prices? -
you may have a point there, but lose the argument when you add (for what
they are). With out a doubt they are the best performing engines in the
lighter Kitfoxes hands down. If your goal is setting a low cost record as
some have tried in the scrounged parts hobby - as reported occasionally in
the mags - you have a point, but if you want to fly behind an extemely
reliable, high power / weight engine, you can't beat the R-9xx series
engines or even the two strokes in their hp range.
I'd Love to have you join the group on it's way down to Arizona to the
Desert Fox Squadron fly-in next week or maybe the group flight this summer
to Idaho's back country to compare performance - side by side. Or maybe
better get together with Dave and fly along side him as he does his short
field takeoffs in his early 582 powered Kitfox - yours is a II, isn't it? I
think he has a II.
I think you just caused about 100 guys on the list to choke on their coffee
this morning after reading your post - both the 582 and 912 - 14 guys.
Lowell
do not srchive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bradley M Webb" <bmwebb@cox.net>
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 3:31 AM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Nose gear parts
>
> Oh come on, Lowell. He doesn't like them for the same reason many others
> of
> us don't. Too noisy, too much vibration, outrageous prices (for what they
> are), too many rebuilds, sudden stoppages...the list goes on and on.
>
> You've heard it all before...
> Bradley
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-
>>server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lowell Fitt
>>Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 12:23 PM
>>To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
>>Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Nose gear parts
>>
>>
>>Jerry,
>>
>>I would be interested in your reasons for not liking Rotax.
>>
>>Lowell
>>do not archive
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Jerry Saar" <chalengr@interl.net>
>>To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>>Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 5:32 AM
>>Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Nose gear parts
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Michael Gibbs" <MichaelGibbs@cox.net>
>>> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>>> Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 2:48 AM
>>> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Nose gear parts
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Jerry sez:
>>>>
>>>>>I am thinking about buying a unfinished classic 4 and would like to
>>>>>make
>>>>>it a trigear, would anyone know where there is nose gear parts and also
>>>>>engine mount parts for a lycoming.
>>>>
>>>> Nose wheel parts should be available from Kitfox, LLC:
>>>> <http://www.kitfoxaircraft.com>. Before you make the purchase, you
>>>> should run some weight and balance numbers and consider the weight of
>>>> that engine. You may find that you won't have much useful load left
>>>> unless you go with a lighter engine.
>>>>
>>>> Mike G.
>>>> N728KF
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> 7:52 AM
>>>>
>>>>Thanks , I checked with Kitfox and the parts are pretty pricey new, what
>>>>other engines are availible, I just don't like Rotax.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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: Nose gear parts |
Amen Lowell. I wouldn't take anything for the 912 in
my Kitfox. 10 yrs and 400hrs and it still runs
strong and quiet. With that said, I'm not brand
centric either as I have the Sube in the N11 and I'm
putting an 0-360 in the Bearhawk I'm building. To me
it's all about picking the right engine for the right
application.
Regards,
Ted
--- Original Message ---
From: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Nose gear parts
<lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
>
>Thanks Jerry,
>
>I will offer an opinion. Overpriced? likely true.
Short lived? I could
>argue that point unless you are referring to the two
stroke. I just did a
>comprehensive annual condition inspection and the
compression was 78, 79,
>78, 79 over 80 after 830 hours and I have never used
a drop of oil between
>oil changes. Lots of folks like the water cooled
because there are certain
>inflight issues that are a no brainer with water
cooling and cooling system
>failures are virtually non existant. I have never
heard of one. The gear
>boxes are noisy, but, of course, that is engineered
into it to smooth out
>the torsional vibration. You never hear it in flight.
>
> I might encourage you to reconsider Rotax if you
are interested in
>performance. I doubt at this point there is an
engine in it's weight class
>that can compete in performance in the Kitfox.
>
>One thing that a Rotax pilot has to overcome or more
exactly ignore is the
>lawn blower comments. It doesn't bother me as I
doubt the Lyconimg and
>Continental guys have been to places I have been and
flown at the locations
>I have flown and landed at some of the places. And
for that matter taken
>off from places and climbed out without having to
find the thermals or
>flying the 360s to get over a ridge.
>
>I might suggest, with some prejudice of course, that
you can't beat the
>Rotax for performance and reliability.
>
>Lowell
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Jerry Saar" <chalengr@interl.net>
>To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 7:10 PM
>Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Nose gear parts
>
>
<chalengr@interl.net>
>>
>> I feel the rotax are overpriced , short lived,
expensive to overhaul and
>> then they are liquid cooled on top of it, and the
gearboxes sound like my
>> great granpa's threshing machine. there has has to
be something better. I
>> have built two glasairs with lycomings but they
seem too big for a kitfox.
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
>> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 11:22 AM
>> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Nose gear parts
>>
>>
<lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
>>>
>>> Jerry,
>>>
>>> I would be interested in your reasons for not
liking Rotax.
>>>
>>> Lowell
>>> do not archive
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Jerry Saar" <chalengr@interl.net>
>>> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>>> Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 5:32 AM
>>> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Nose gear parts
>>>
>>>
<chalengr@interl.net>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Michael Gibbs" <MichaelGibbs@cox.net>
>>>> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 2:48 AM
>>>> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Nose gear parts
>>>>
>>>>
Gibbs <MichaelGibbs@cox.net>
>>>>>
>>>>> Jerry sez:
>>>>>
>>>>>>I am thinking about buying a unfinished classic
4 and would like to
>>>>>>make it a trigear, would anyone know where
there is nose gear parts and
>>>>>>also engine mount parts for a lycoming.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nose wheel parts should be available from
Kitfox, LLC:
>>>>> <http://www.kitfoxaircraft.com>. Before you
make the purchase, you
>>>>> should run some weight and balance numbers and
consider the weight of
>>>>> that engine. You may find that you won't have
much useful load left
>>>>> unless you go with a lighter engine.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mike G.
>>>>> N728KF
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> 7:52 AM
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks , I checked with Kitfox and the parts are
pretty pricey new, what
>>>>>other engines are availible, I just don't like
Rotax.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 7:44 AM
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>_-
=====================================================
=====
browse
Subscriptions page,
FAQ,
List
>_-
=====================================================
=====
Web Forums!
>_-
=====================================================
=====
>
>
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: | Re: Best prop was: Fuel consumption based on gallons |
per hour
Has any one tried the Kool prop? There is a guy putting them on trikes and
says they are the best. Not that I doubt him but he is the agent.
Noel
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob
> Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 10:12 AM
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Best prop was: Fuel consumption
> based on gallons per hour
>
>
>
> Hi Randy -
> I'm building an early 5 and it looks like you've done what
> I'm trying to get to. Great job on keeping the weight down!
> Being an engineer, I really appreciate the data and hope that
> you don't mind my plotting it. That really IS a huge
> difference between props!
> Bob
>
> --------
> Remember that internet advice may only be worth what you pay.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=102458#102458
>
>
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/daughenbaugh_speeds_829.jpg
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: Nose gear parts |
After the last couple of weeks on this list, I'm about done with posting
here. I have mine, you have yours...I'll leave it at that, and not get
sucked into this argument.
Good day,
Bradley
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-
>server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lowell Fitt
>Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 12:32 PM
>To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Nose gear parts
>
>
>Bradley,
>
>If I might, I would like an answer from Jerry which incidentally came this
>morning. But too noisy? - you gotta be kidding. I live in a residential
>airpark and get tons of comments on my quiet engine and this from folks
>that
>are immersed in aviation. Vibration? - kidding again. Outrageous prices?
>-
>you may have a point there, but lose the argument when you add (for what
>they are). With out a doubt they are the best performing engines in the
>lighter Kitfoxes hands down. If your goal is setting a low cost record as
>some have tried in the scrounged parts hobby - as reported occasionally in
>the mags - you have a point, but if you want to fly behind an extemely
>reliable, high power / weight engine, you can't beat the R-9xx series
>engines or even the two strokes in their hp range.
>
>I'd Love to have you join the group on it's way down to Arizona to the
>Desert Fox Squadron fly-in next week or maybe the group flight this summer
>to Idaho's back country to compare performance - side by side. Or maybe
>better get together with Dave and fly along side him as he does his short
>field takeoffs in his early 582 powered Kitfox - yours is a II, isn't it?
>I
>think he has a II.
>
>I think you just caused about 100 guys on the list to choke on their coffee
>this morning after reading your post - both the 582 and 912 - 14 guys.
>
>Lowell
>do not srchive
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Bradley M Webb" <bmwebb@cox.net>
>To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 3:31 AM
>Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Nose gear parts
>
>
>>
>> Oh come on, Lowell. He doesn't like them for the same reason many others
>> of
>> us don't. Too noisy, too much vibration, outrageous prices (for what they
>> are), too many rebuilds, sudden stoppages...the list goes on and on.
>>
>> You've heard it all before...
>> Bradley
>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-
>>>server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lowell Fitt
>>>Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 12:23 PM
>>>To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
>>>Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Nose gear parts
>>>
>>>
>>>Jerry,
>>>
>>>I would be interested in your reasons for not liking Rotax.
>>>
>>>Lowell
>>>do not archive
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: "Jerry Saar" <chalengr@interl.net>
>>>To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>>>Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 5:32 AM
>>>Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Nose gear parts
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Michael Gibbs" <MichaelGibbs@cox.net>
>>>> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 2:48 AM
>>>> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Nose gear parts
>>>>
>>>>
><MichaelGibbs@cox.net>
>>>>>
>>>>> Jerry sez:
>>>>>
>>>>>>I am thinking about buying a unfinished classic 4 and would like to
>>>>>>make
>>>>>>it a trigear, would anyone know where there is nose gear parts and
>also
>>>>>>engine mount parts for a lycoming.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nose wheel parts should be available from Kitfox, LLC:
>>>>> <http://www.kitfoxaircraft.com>. Before you make the purchase, you
>>>>> should run some weight and balance numbers and consider the weight of
>>>>> that engine. You may find that you won't have much useful load left
>>>>> unless you go with a lighter engine.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mike G.
>>>>> N728KF
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> 7:52 AM
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks , I checked with Kitfox and the parts are pretty pricey new,
>what
>>>>>other engines are availible, I just don't like Rotax.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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 |
|
I want to thank everyone who offer to take my plane or offered advice
I never expected to get a response like that to my offer, I didn't think
there would many
people interested in an old used plane. my count is 58 replies
I decided to pass it on to a club group thinking more people would get some
use from the
parts that way.
Have a good day Charlie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob" <dswaim1119@comcast.net>
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 5:25 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: plane sale
>
> That's quite an offer, but it may be enlightening to talk to the folks at
> EAA HQ before letting the plane be broken.
>
> Many liability suits against homebuilders of the lighter lower-cost
> airplanes like ours have largely fizzled because our pockets are too
> shallow. Of course, your finances may vary and you can get sued by
> somebody down the road for anything. The fact is that the potential
> liability for selling one of your Kitfox instruments that a jury is later
> wrongly persuaded to blame for an accident (example: the Governor Carnahan
> accident) is pretty much the same as if your intact airplane were flown
> into a tree.
>
> One of the things that benefits us is that courts consider "assumed risk"
> of people getting into the airplane. If somebody climbs into a Lancair
> IV-P or an RV-7/-9, they might persuade a court that they assumed it was
> as safe as an American Eagle turboprop. If somebody got into a fabric
> covered homebuilt taildragger that weighs less than a Honda Goldwing,
> especially out of a dirt field where Kitfoxes frequent, no jury in the
> land will buy that argument.
>
> If my last name was Forbes, I'd make sure the airplane was burned 100% to
> ashes or donate it to a museum. However, homebuilders have generally been
> found to be so small financially that the attorneys are going straight
> after the deeper pocket insurance companies of component suppliers like
> Rotax or the airport, especially if the plane was built to plans.
>
> Not trying to start a big liability thread, or one about lawyers, or what
> people think of lawsuits, as those have been hashed and re-hashed. Just
> suggesting a phone call. Sometimes it's good to be the little fish.
>
> Bob
> do not archive
>
> --------
> Remember that internet advice may only be worth what you pay.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=101572#101572
>
>
>
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: SELLING PLANE |
I want to thank everyone who offer to take my plane or offered advice
I never expected to get a response like that to my offer, I didn't think
there would many
people interested in an old used plane. my count is 58 replies
I decided to pass it on to a club group thinking more people would get some
use from the
parts that way.
Have a good day Charlie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Damen69" <damen69@comcast.net>
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 8:17 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: SELLING PLANE
>
> Hello Charlie,
> Sorry to hear about you hanging up the headset. I'm sure you enjoyed the
> 600 hours spent in the Kitfox. I am in the process of learning about
> airframes and engines. I am in Connecticut and would love to pick up the
> Kitfox. I will use it as a learning project for me and my boys. never to
> be used. I understand your concerns about liability.
>
> Please email me at damen69@comcast.net
>
> I can pick it up anytime with a car trailer.
>
> Thanks,
> Damen
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=102220#102220
>
>
>
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: SELLING PLANE |
I want to thank everyone who offer to take my plane or offered advice
I never expected to get a response like that to my offer, I didn't think
there would many
people interested in an old used plane. my count is 58 replies
I decided to pass it on to a club group thinking more people would get some
use from the
parts that way.
Have a good day Charlie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kem Dunnebacke" <jboatm16@netzero.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 5:12 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: SELLING PLANE
>
> Morning Charlie, i tried to reach you by email a couple of times early on
> but no response,so maybe here will help? i have cleared this weekend to
> make the trip up your way if you want? my email is kitfoxivplay@gmail.com
> thanks kem
>
> --------
> kitfox IV PLAY Speedster H-30
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=102265#102265
>
>
>
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: selling plane |
Hello Charlie,
Sorry to hear that you are hanging it up. Flying gets us all pretty close to
heaven while still drawing in breath.
Do you still have the parts plane?
I an a poorboy wanna-be flyer. Since the wife is pretty good on the internet
she follows my expences pretty close. It always eseems like braces for my
kid, a new roof, or some such gets to the cash before I do.
Do you know off the top how much cash it would take to get her flying again?
How many parts would a guy need to buy or build?
Bradley in Toronto
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charlie" <cfbflyer@localnet.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 2:37 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: selling plane
>
> The time to hang up the head set has finally arrived for me
> So due to the liability exposure I'm going to scrap my non flying 10 year
> old 600 hour
> mod 4 with 582 engine
>
> If any one wants it for parts its free if you pick it up , I cannot
> deliver it
> There are no log books or parts lists or registration
> Its as is where is
> Location is Kingston , NY
>
> cfbflyer@localnet.com
> **********************************************************************
> I thought that might go over as a good joke, but I'm overwhelmed with
> offers to take it.
> ----------------------
> as I understand the 51% rule you can't recertify a plane that has been
> scraped and some of
> the memo's sound like that is what is intended.
> as I understand the liability I am the builder and if I sell it as a
> certified plane and
> someone ( no matter who) lands in a field and kills a cow any friend of
> the cow can sue
> me or my estate because I am the builder. that is why I will not let it go
> as a certified
> plane.
>
> ---------------------
> so lets start over and only people that can realistically come and get the
> plane respond and
> include your email address , I have some difficulty using the phone, and I
> will go into
> detail on its
> condition without cluttering up the forum.
> it is in my shed with the wings folded, not at an airport.
>
> thanks to all that have responded to my posting.
>
> Have a good day Charlie
>
>
> --
> 8:07 AM
>
>
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: | Airport access update, I got a key |
A couple months ago I asked on the list for help about being denied access to our
local airport. I wrote a letter to the airport advisory board and included
the refrences from the FAA I received from a couple list members and a few other
ideas too.
last week the board looked into this and surprise, surprise. The policy already
exists for people with airplanes on trailes to be issued a gate key.
I went in to see the airport manager today and she issued me a key, no problem.
Thanks all!!
Tom Jones
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=102568#102568
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: Source code in posts - Off topic |
MessageI did not
----- Original Message -----
From: Noel Loveys
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 10:46 AM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Source code in posts - Off topic
Did any one get any source code from this??
Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Noel Loveys
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 2:31 PM
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Source code in posts - Off topic
I have been thinking about this for a few days. The one difference
I have heard was the use of Microsoft Plus to compose the messages.
I'm thinking if he composed directly into the E-Mail client the code
would disappear. The Email client, Outlook or Outlook Express, needs to
have the outgoing messages formatted for "text rich" script. I'm going
to intentionally put some of this code into this post hoping it won't
come through as squiggly lines. If it does come through as the squiggly
lines I apologize and assure you it is the last time you will see code
form me, If not, I have found out what is causing the code. And all
that has to be done is avoid composing in Plus.
Do not archive
Noel
Kitfox III-A
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Larry/Cathy Boone
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 2:25 AM
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Source code in posts - Off topic
>
>
> <cathyboone@softcom.net>
>
> My point-- if the message is difficult to read because a
> computer program
> changes the typed figure/letters into another form and then
> the message
> literally looks like the message sender had his fingers on
> the wrong keys,
> then the first impression is that the message is garbage or
> at least not
> quickly deciphered or maybe not worth the effort to decipher.
> If the sender
> has a quick fix available, why not use it?
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <Kitfoxv@comcast.net>
> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 8:18 PM
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Source code in posts - Off topic
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> >> "if the message looks like garbage it could very well be
> garbage and/or
> >> the
> >> source of it is a producer of garbage. "
> >
> > what's your point?
> > steve
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ===========
> Kitfox-List Email Forum - the Matronics List Features Navigator to
browse many List utilities such as the Subscriptions page, Archive
Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much much
more:
>
HREF="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matron
ics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List
> ===========
> bsp; - NEW MATRONICS WEB FORUMS - great content now also
available via the Web Forums!
> HREF="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
> ===========
>
>
>
>
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matron
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
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! --
|