Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:43 AM - engine selection (fox5flyer)
2. 05:25 AM - Re: Re: engine selection (Lynn Matteson)
3. 05:36 AM - Re: Engine Choices (av8rps)
4. 06:07 AM - Re: Pros' & Cons' 912UL vs 912ULS (av8rps)
5. 06:19 AM - Re: Re: Engine Choices (JC Propeller Design)
6. 06:19 AM - Re: engine selection (Lynn Matteson)
7. 06:47 AM - Re: Re: Engine Choices (Lynn Matteson)
8. 08:11 AM - Re: How to increase lift on horizontal stab? (LarryM)
9. 08:50 AM - Re: Re: Engine Choices (Guy Buchanan)
10. 09:41 AM - Re: Re: Engine Choices (Lynn Matteson)
11. 11:41 AM - Simply the best engines to use (jason Parker)
12. 11:52 AM - Re: Re: Engine Choices (Michel Verheughe)
13. 11:57 AM - cabin heat (Bruce Oviatt)
14. 12:20 PM - Re: engine selection (Noel Loveys)
15. 12:44 PM - Re: Re: Wanted Douglas Wheel(s) (RAY Gignac)
16. 12:48 PM - Re: cabin heat (Pete Christensen)
17. 01:19 PM - Re: cabin heat (n85ae)
18. 01:22 PM - Re: Ignition pb on 582 (Renaud)
19. 01:49 PM - Re: Simply the best engines to use (JC Propeller Design)
20. 01:55 PM - Re: engine selection (Noel Loveys)
21. 04:09 PM - Re: Re: Maximum Miles Per Gallon in a Kitfox? (Noel Loveys)
22. 04:36 PM - Battery Location (Pat Reilly)
23. 06:06 PM - Re: Battery Location (Marco Menezes)
24. 06:18 PM - Re: Battery Location (LarryM)
25. 06:25 PM - Build time? (jlfernan)
26. 06:31 PM - Re: Re: How to increase lift on horizontal stab? (Noel Loveys)
27. 06:32 PM - Re: Kitfox-List Digest: 31 Msgs - 12/19/07 (riquenkelly@aol.com)
28. 06:34 PM - Re: Re: Battery Location (Marwynne)
29. 06:35 PM - Re: Re: cabin heat (=?utf-8?B?Qy4gRGF2aWQgRXN0YXBh?=)
30. 06:43 PM - Re: Build time? (kirk hull)
31. 06:45 PM - Re: Battery Location (Tom Jones)
32. 06:51 PM - Re: Re: Battery Location (kirk hull)
33. 06:53 PM - Re: Build time? (Tom Jones)
34. 07:09 PM - Re: cabin heat (Don G)
35. 07:09 PM - Re: How to increase lift on horizontal stab? (dave)
36. 07:13 PM - Re: Battery Location (dave)
37. 07:20 PM - Re: Build time? (Roger McConnell)
38. 07:25 PM - Re: Re: Kitfox-List Digest: 31 Msgs - 12/19/07 (floran higgins)
39. 07:32 PM - Re: Simply the best engines to use (Noel Loveys)
40. 07:45 PM - Re: Battery Location (Noel Loveys)
41. 08:12 PM - Re: Simply the best engines to use (Tim Vader)
42. 08:24 PM - Re: Protecting a plane while transporting... (Ron Zeppin)
43. 08:38 PM - Re: Simply the best engines to use (Noel Loveys)
44. 10:06 PM - Re: Build time? (Guy Buchanan)
45. 10:06 PM - Re: Battery Location (Guy Buchanan)
46. 11:38 PM - Re: Simply the best engines to use (JC Propeller Design)
47. 11:41 PM - Re: engine selection (Michel Verheughe)
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: | engine selection |
Interesting post Lynn. I also agree that all this talk about engine weights
and airplane weights means nothing because no two setups are alike and
people don't weigh things the same way, nor are they all weighed on the same
set of scales. This engine weight debate has been a common thread here on
this list for as long as I can remember and other than a whole bunch of
opinions, nothing has been accomplished and the issue usually just fades
away until someone else brings it up and brags about how much their airplane
weighs. Then it starts back up again with the same result.
Your proposal is a bit radical, but definitely has some merit and it may
lead to something useful, but it takes a central and credible overseer,
possibly the EAA. As we all know, advertising engine weights is especially
critical when comparing air cooled vs liquid cooled engines because the
liquid cooled engine requires many more components to be operable and those
components need to be weighed also.
What I haven't seen is a simple standard developed for engine weighing. It
could be a very simple and so long as it's followed, fairly accurate weights
could be advertised. It's interesting to watch this whole thing unfold
because instead of objective analysis what I'm seeing is people defending
their choice of engines. Perhaps an ego thing or perhaps some people don't
like to think or admit that someone else may have made a better choice than
they did.
Throwing rocks at those who use other than Rotax is counter productive to
the experimental movement because it steers people away from supporting the
grass roots movements in the experimental engines. There was a time when
the 582 was laughed at as being a "whiny snowmobile engine" and too
unreliable to use in an airplane. Bombardier (owner of Rotax) is a huge
world-wide company with unlimited resources for advertising, research,
development, etc, just as Lycoming and Continental once were. Jabiru is by
comparison a tiny company that is trying to supply a good engine alternative
to the Rotax, but it's an uphill battle because they don't have the
resources compared to Rotax. Then there are the Subarus, Corvairs, Geos,
etc. Until there is a clear and objective standard developed and enforced,
these debates are not very effective for the novice who is looking for the
best package for his airplane.
Check the links below for lots of information on alternative engines.
Again, this information is only worth the paper it's printed on.
http://home.adelphia.net/~aeroengine/Contents.html
http://www.aviationlinks.net/activelinks/engines/
http://www.aerofiles.com/motors.html
http://www.aviator.cc/engines2.html
Deke Morisse
Mikado Michigan
S5/Subaru/CAP 355+ TT
"Nothing will ever be attempted, if all possible objections must first be
overcome".- Samuel Johnson
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lynn Matteson" <lynnmatt@jps.net>
Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 9:21 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: engine selection
>
> This sounds like the groundwork for an interesting magazine article...one
> that would help a lot of folks make the decision as to engine selection.
> The only true and honest way to do it would be to actually have access to
> the engines in question. Why this hasn't been done is beyond me...or has
> it? There must have, by now, been done a survey of all the available
> engines that are appropriate for the homebuilders needs? If not, why not?
> Sounds like an article that should be written by Kitplanes to me....maybe
> a joint venture between Kitplanes, Sport Pilot, Sport Aviation...others?
> Maybe that's not a good idea either. But there could be an impartial
> weighing at a central site....hey....how about Oshkosh this year? It's
> supposed to be about "experimental aviation" isn't it? Well, here's a
> perfect format for something that is really in the homebuilders' minds.
> Oshkosh has long been going to "showtime" and forgetting the little guy
> who was the reason behind it all. Why not a forum at Oshkosh where the
> engine suppliers bring their engines in and get them weighed. Wait a
> minute, I'm way ahead of you...AFTER the weighing....the engine would
> have to be started and run for a to-be- determined length of time...maybe
> even flown in a plane by the guy who is standing behind that engine. That
> would eliminate the empty blocks, the featherweight crankshafts, etc. And
> make it a claiming competition, where the engine would have to be sold at
> the going price, so no super-light mods would be made that would be
> prohibitively costly to the supplier.
>
> This may be a radical thought, or series of thoughts, but I believe along
> these lines there is some merit. There is an engine-builders competition
> that has been shown on Speed Channel, where NASCAR engine builders
> assemble an engine, racing against the clock and another team, to see who
> can get an engine together the fastest, make it run for a couple of
> minutes, and then have all the torques checked to be sure somebody didn't
> just spin a nut on and call it "done."
>
> Maybe we could have a forum where individuals could bring in their
> planes, pull the engine, and weigh it. Impartial judges could be on hand,
> and certified scales, and the results made available by the weeks end.
> Hell, I'd be willing to pull my engine right then and there for a
> weighing, then reinstall it and go fly it. Participants could be given
> some sort of "badge of courage" for their efforts, like the mug they give
> for participation in the Homebuilder's Review. By Jove, I do believe I'm
> on to something here!
>
> The previous writing is copywrited by Lynn C. Matteson, author, and in no
> way shall the ideas contained herein be stolen, used, copied or otherwise
> "ripped off" without due compensation. : )
>
>
> Lynn Matteson
> Grass Lake, Michigan
> Kitfox IV Speedster w/Jabiru 2200
> flying w/460+ hrs
>
>
> On Jan 13, 2008, at 7:26 PM, av8rps wrote:
>
>>
>> (Lynn Matteson wrote "]Paul- Mine weighed 650 lbs at the weigh-in, and
>> I've probably added another 20 with x-ponder, different radio, heat
>> muffs, scat hose, etc....)
>>
>> Lynn,
>>
>> This is interesting information. Looks like our Model IV kitfoxes are a
>> lot the same, even though they vary by options. We each have things
>> that are heavier than the others plane, but also have things that are
>> lighter. So all in all it seems to pretty well balance out. Not
>> scientific, but generally it goes to prove there isn't a substantial
>> difference between the Jab and the Rotax by the time the airplane is
>> done
>>
>> I weighed my plane three times, twice on wheels, and once when when
>> putting it on the floats. I only used electronic scales when doing the
>> float W&B, but the numbers jived pretty well with what the other scales
>> told us. So I believe my numbers are relatively accurate. My empty
>> weight numbers also are pretty average when comparing to other 912 Model
>> IV's, which run between 625 and 675 lbs typically.
>>
>> I agree weighing engines as you described would be best. But really,
>> average numbers for the various models will give the group here a good
>> feel for what they can expect for average weights.
>>
>> I've learned a long time ago that even though the specs say one thing,
>> by the time you get the airplane done, it can be all different. A good
>> example of that is my buddy that built an Avid Mark IV with a 618 rotax
>> a few years back. After flying it a couple of years he replaced the 618
>> with a 912 ul, and his net empty weight gain was only 12 pounds. We all
>> tried to figure out how that could be, but in the end gave up trying to
>> figure out how that was possible. He's too busy flying the airplane now
>> to worry about it. But it still mystifies all of us, including him.
>>
>> I hope the group can further this study of various models with various
>> engine weights. That could be really useful information for any of us.
>>
>> Paul Seehafer
>>
>> --------
>> Model IV-1200 912ul Amphib
>> Avid Flyer
>> Lake Amphibian
>> Central Wisconsin
>> paul676@tds.net
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=157880#157880
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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: engine selection |
Hmmmmm....don't most of these authors, once they do an article like
this, get to keep the stuff they write about? : )
Lynn
do not archive
On Jan 14, 2008, at 12:09 AM, Marco Menezes wrote:
> Great idea Lynn. I know just the guy to write the article. Verrry
> experienced. ;-)
>
> do not archive
>
> Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net> wrote:
>
> This sounds like the groundwork for an interesting magazine
> article...one that would help a lot of folks make the decision as to
> engine selection. The only true and honest way to do it would be to
> actually have access to the engines in question. Why this hasn't been
> done is beyond me...or has it? There must have, by now, been done a
> survey of all the available engines that are appropriate for the
> homebuilders needs? If not, why not? Sounds like an article that
> should be written by Kitplanes to me....maybe a joint venture between
> Kitplanes, Sport Pilot, Sport Aviation...others? Maybe that's not a
> good idea either. But there could be an impartial weighing at a
> central site....hey....how about Oshkosh this year? It's supposed to
> be about "experimental aviation" isn't it? Well, here's a perfect
> format for something that is really in the homebuilders' minds.
> Oshkosh has long been going to "showtime" and forgetting the little
> guy who was the reason behind it all. Why not a forum at Oshkosh
> where the engine suppliers bring their engines in and get them
> weighed. Wait a minute, I'm way ahead of you...AFTER the
> weighing....the engine would have to be started and run for a to-be-
> determined length of time...maybe even flown in a plane by the guy
> who is standing behind that engine. That would eliminate the empty
> blocks, the featherweight crankshafts, etc. And make it a claiming
> competition, where the engine would have to be sold at the going
> price, so no super-light mods would be made that would be
> prohibitively costly to the supplier.
>
> This may be a radical thought, or series of thoughts, but I believe
> along these lines there is some merit. There is an engine-builders
> competition that has been shown on Speed Channel, where NASCAR engine
> builders assemble an engine, racing against the clock and another
> team, to see who can get an engine together the fastest, make it run
> for a couple of minutes, and then have all the torques checked to be
> sure somebody didn't just spin a nut on and call it "done."
>
> Maybe we could have a forum where individuals could bring in their
> planes, pull the engine, and weigh it. Impartial judges could be on
> hand, and certified scales, and the results made available by the
> weeks end. Hell, I'd be willing to pull my engine right then and
> there for a weighing, then reinstall it and go fly it. Participants
> could be given some sort of "badge of courage" for their efforts,
> like the mug they give for participation in the Homebuilder's Review.
> By Jove, I do believe I'm on to something here!
>
> The previous writing is copywrited by Lynn C. Matteson, author, and
> in no way shall the ideas contained herein be stolen, used, copied or
> otherwise "ripped off" without due compensation. : )
>
>
> Lynn Matteson
> Grass Lake, Michigan
> Kitfox IV Speedster w/Jabiru 2200
> flying w/460+ hrs
>
>
> On Jan 13, 2008, at 7:26 PM, av8rps wrote:
>
> >
> > (Lynn Matteson wrote "]Paul- Mine weighed 650 lbs at the weigh-in,
> > and I've probably added another 20 with x-ponder, different radio,
> > heat muffs, scat hose, etc....)
> >
> > Lynn,
> >
> > This is interesting information. Looks like our Model IV kitfoxes
> > are a lot the same, even though they vary by options. We each have
> > things that are heavier than the others plane, but also have things
> > that are lighter. So all in all it seems to pretty well balance
> > out. Not scientific, but generally it goes to prove there isn't a
> > substantial difference between the Jab and the Rotax by the time
> > the airplane is done
> >
> > I weighed my plane three times, twice on wheels, and once when when
> > putting it on the floats. I only used electronic scales when doing
> > the float W&B, but the numbers jived pretty well with what the
> > other scales told us. So I believe my numbers are relatively
> > accurate. My empty weight numbers also are pretty average when
> > comparing to other 912 Model IV's, which run between 625 and 675
> > lbs typically.
> >
> > I agree weighing engines as you described would be best. But
> > really, average numbers for the various models will give the group
> > here a good feel for what they can expect for average weights.
> >
> > I've learned a long time ago that even though the specs say one
> > thing, by the time you get the airplane done, it can be all
> > different. A good example of that is my buddy that built an Avid
> > Mark IV with a 618 rotax a few years back. After flying it a
> > couple of years he replaced the 618 with a 912 ul, and his net
> > empty weight gain was only 12 pounds. We all tried to figure out
> > how that could be, but in the end gave up trying to figure out how
> > that was possible. He's too busy flying the airplane now to worry
> > about it. But it still mystifies all of us, including him.
> >
> > I hope the group can further this study of various models with
> > various engine weights. That could be really useful information
> > for any of us.
> >
> > Paul Seehafer
> >
> > --------
> > Model IV-1200 912ul Amphib
> > Avid Flyer
> > Lake Amphibian
> www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List _-
> www.matronics.com/contribution _-
> ===========================================================
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 |
(Lynn Matteson says "At the risk of becoming annoying (I know, I've already passed
that milestone), forget the airplanes! Weigh the freakin' engines!")
Lynn,
Don't get me wrong. I agree that weighing the complete and flyable engine packages
would be best. But that would be quite an undertaking, not probable to happen
anytime soon. Plus, as you said earlier it would be difficult to make certain
it was done without having someones thumb on the scale, so to speak.
So my idea of using averages for various engines and models with options and equipment
was just to provide those in question with that, an average they could
expect if they built or bought one similar to the ones owners listed.
As an example; With as many 912 powered Kitfoxes out there, and all the information
that has been shared here on the list, it has become pretty easy to come
up with an average for a 912 model IV. Plain and simple, a 912 model IV as an
average will run between 625 and 675 lbs. Light ones will be in the low 600's,
and heavy ones in the 700 lb range. It's really as simple as that. I don't
know about you, but if I was building and considering using a 912 that would
be helpful information for me.
And if I were torn between the Jab and the 912, and I also knew the average for
a Jabiru powered Model IV was in the same empty weight range, I'd probably start
asking owners for performance numbers, once again trying to come up with
an average of what I could expect.
Now if a builder really wanted to get scientific beyond this list of averages,
having exact engine flying weights would be great. From that they could determine
horsepower per pound numbers, which is really all that is important (unless
the weight is just more than his airframe was designed for). But better yet,
prop thrust per pound is the number I'd be looking for. And I'd make sure
the prop used in the thrust test was appropriate to the airframe I was going to
install the engine on (E.g.; prop that works good on a Sonex probably isn't
the best prop for a Kitfox). So once again, I agree with your idea that it would
be best to have accurate engine info in front of anyone trying to make a decision
about engine choice. Unfortunately, all that information isn't available
unless some great writer we know (big smile) takes on that arduous task.
But we do have Kitfoxes that are flying with a variety of engines, and options
right now. So we have the ability to come up with good averages for empty weights,
as well as performance. So the guy that just wants to keep building so
he can get in the air as soon as possible can do so. He doesn't have to spend
hours pouring over information, hoping what he thought was correct information
works out like he planned. We already have gained the experience with our Kitfoxes,
and have proven results. That can save builders a lot of time, and money
most likely, while also providing them with an engine decision they will
be happy with.
And for what it's worth, this is good banter for this list. While we might be
boring some readers to death, or appear to be arguing the Jab vs the 912, I'm
certain what has been discussed here has already been helping some to better make
an engine decision.
Paul Seehafer
--------
Model IV-1200 912ul Amphib
Avid Flyer
Lake Amphibian
Central Wisconsin
paul676@tds.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=157951#157951
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: Pros' & Cons' 912UL vs 912ULS |
(Dale says "Speaking of the Rotax 912........... I have a newby question. I
don't own a Kitfox yet, and I'm still considering buying a flying one. I'm thinking
about a model IV with a 912.
What are the Pro's & Con's of the 912UL vs the 912ULS? Of course the obvious,
the 912ULS has 20 more hp. Are there any down sides to having the 912ULS?
Is it a HUGE performace difference between them? I have run across more 80hp
models than 100hp models forsale....")
Dale,
A really economical way to get the best of both worlds is to buy that 80 hp Model
IV and then install the high compression pistons in it that Mastercraft has
available for the 912 (I believe Lockwood also sells them now)
Here's a copy of a post off the forum a while back on this subject;
> Clint,
> Is it possible to modify the 912UL into a 912 ULS?
I can help with this question...
The short answer is; not entirely.
You can install these high compression pistons and get a nice boost in
power: http://www.masterkraft.com/
In our first kitfox, we installed these at about 250 hours. The engine and
pistons now have well over 1000 hours and is still running great. We did an
overhaul at about 1000 hours because the engine ingested some washers and
damaged two pistons, but two of the pistons installed at 250 hours are still
in there. Lockwood said that other than the washer damage, the engine was in
great shape, showing little if any wear. They even had the Masterkraft
pistons in stock.
What you won't get with this mod is the different gear ratio used on the
912ULS. You may not get the full extra 20 hp of the ULS, but you get close.
On a model 4, it would be awesome!
The only downside that I can think of is that you may get some oil seepage
from around the rocker covers after several hundred hours. I don't know if
that was really the fault of the pistons or not, but the fix was for
Lockwood to resurface the rocker covers. That stopped the leaking. It may be
that many 912's without the high compression pistons suffer this leakage
also, I just don't know. (though I have heard of some 80 hp 912's with this
problem)
I hope this info helps.
Best Regards,
Cliff
Erie, CO
S5, Lycoming 0-235
****** end of original message*****
Paul Seehafer
--------
Model IV-1200 912ul Amphib
Avid Flyer
Lake Amphibian
Central Wisconsin
paul676@tds.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=157965#157965
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 |
This might be the future:
http://ppdgemini.com/_PDF/Gemini100_Spec_Sheet.pdf
Jan
----- Original Message -----
From: "av8rps" <paul676@tds.net>
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 2:35 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Engine Choices
>
> (Lynn Matteson says "At the risk of becoming annoying (I know, I've
> already passed that milestone), forget the airplanes! Weigh the freakin'
> engines!")
>
> Lynn,
>
> Don't get me wrong. I agree that weighing the complete and flyable engine
> packages would be best. But that would be quite an undertaking, not
> probable to happen anytime soon. Plus, as you said earlier it would be
> difficult to make certain it was done without having someones thumb on the
> scale, so to speak.
>
> So my idea of using averages for various engines and models with options
> and equipment was just to provide those in question with that, an average
> they could expect if they built or bought one similar to the ones owners
> listed.
>
> As an example; With as many 912 powered Kitfoxes out there, and all the
> information that has been shared here on the list, it has become pretty
> easy to come up with an average for a 912 model IV. Plain and simple, a
> 912 model IV as an average will run between 625 and 675 lbs. Light ones
> will be in the low 600's, and heavy ones in the 700 lb range. It's really
> as simple as that. I don't know about you, but if I was building and
> considering using a 912 that would be helpful information for me.
>
> And if I were torn between the Jab and the 912, and I also knew the
> average for a Jabiru powered Model IV was in the same empty weight range,
> I'd probably start asking owners for performance numbers, once again
> trying to come up with an average of what I could expect.
>
> Now if a builder really wanted to get scientific beyond this list of
> averages, having exact engine flying weights would be great. From that
> they could determine horsepower per pound numbers, which is really all
> that is important (unless the weight is just more than his airframe was
> designed for). But better yet, prop thrust per pound is the number I'd be
> looking for. And I'd make sure the prop used in the thrust test was
> appropriate to the airframe I was going to install the engine on (E.g.;
> prop that works good on a Sonex probably isn't the best prop for a
> Kitfox). So once again, I agree with your idea that it would be best to
> have accurate engine info in front of anyone trying to make a decision
> about engine choice. Unfortunately, all that information isn't available
> unless some great writer we know (big smile) takes on that arduous task.
>
> But we do have Kitfoxes that are flying with a variety of engines, and
> options right now. So we have the ability to come up with good averages
> for empty weights, as well as performance. So the guy that just wants to
> keep building so he can get in the air as soon as possible can do so. He
> doesn't have to spend hours pouring over information, hoping what he
> thought was correct information works out like he planned. We already
> have gained the experience with our Kitfoxes, and have proven results.
> That can save builders a lot of time, and money most likely, while also
> providing them with an engine decision they will be happy with.
>
> And for what it's worth, this is good banter for this list. While we
> might be boring some readers to death, or appear to be arguing the Jab vs
> the 912, I'm certain what has been discussed here has already been helping
> some to better make an engine decision.
>
> Paul Seehafer
>
> --------
> Model IV-1200 912ul Amphib
> Avid Flyer
> Lake Amphibian
> Central Wisconsin
> paul676@tds.net
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=157951#157951
>
>
> __________ NOD32 2789 (20080114) Information __________
>
>
>
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: engine selection |
It would be a perfect exercise for the EAA to do. It would have to be
somebody with deep pockets in order to buy the engines in question,
because no supplier is going to send out an engine for free, knowing
that it is going to be weighed for a published comparison against
other engines, knowing that finally the truth will be known.
I purposely went off a "bit radical" because I've heard that most
radical thinkers usually calm down a bit later on and somewhere in
between a good idea is found.
Actually, when I began thinking about engine choices, weight didn't
enter my mind at first. The first was simplicity. I worked under the
hoods of cars for over 20 years, professionally, and longer than that
as a hobby. I saw the influx of crap added to engines, making them
harder and harder to service. Granted some of the additions were smog-
related stuff, but it all added to the complexity of the under-hood
experience. So I knew I wanted a simple engine without a lot of extra
stuff needed to make it work. I like to keep an eye on my engine, and
having it "accessible" is one way to do that.
There were a few other points that helped me make an engine decision
(Sport Pilot Nov.2007...omigod, a shameless plug!), but the LAST was
weight. I'm not one of these guys that concerns himself with saving
each and every last ounce of weight. If I want item such-and-such,
I'll get it, and figure on leaving something out of the baggage sack
when I go on a trip...although you probably wouldn't believe that if
you saw me packing the plane up at Oshkosh last summer. : )
Good call on the ego thing, Deke. There is no doubt a lot of energy
wasted on supporting one's choice, while deep down, some amount of
coveting is churning. This goes for all of us I think, be it engine
choice, airplane, automobile, etc....human nature.
Lynn Matteson
Grass Lake, Michigan
Kitfox IV Speedster w/Jabiru 2200
flying w/460+ hrs
On Jan 14, 2008, at 7:41 AM, fox5flyer wrote:
> <fox5flyer@idealwifi.net>
>
> Interesting post Lynn. I also agree that all this talk about
> engine weights and airplane weights means nothing because no two
> setups are alike and people don't weigh things the same way, nor
> are they all weighed on the same set of scales. This engine weight
> debate has been a common thread here on this list for as long as I
> can remember and other than a whole bunch of opinions, nothing has
> been accomplished and the issue usually just fades away until
> someone else brings it up and brags about how much their airplane
> weighs. Then it starts back up again with the same result.
> Your proposal is a bit radical, but definitely has some merit and
> it may lead to something useful, but it takes a central and
> credible overseer, possibly the EAA. As we all know, advertising
> engine weights is especially critical when comparing air cooled vs
> liquid cooled engines because the liquid cooled engine requires
> many more components to be operable and those components need to be
> weighed also.
> What I haven't seen is a simple standard developed for engine
> weighing. It could be a very simple and so long as it's followed,
> fairly accurate weights could be advertised. It's interesting to
> watch this whole thing unfold because instead of objective analysis
> what I'm seeing is people defending their choice of engines.
> Perhaps an ego thing or perhaps some people don't like to think or
> admit that someone else may have made a better choice than they did.
> Throwing rocks at those who use other than Rotax is counter
> productive to the experimental movement because it steers people
> away from supporting the grass roots movements in the experimental
> engines. There was a time when the 582 was laughed at as being a
> "whiny snowmobile engine" and too unreliable to use in an
> airplane. Bombardier (owner of Rotax) is a huge world-wide company
> with unlimited resources for advertising, research, development,
> etc, just as Lycoming and Continental once were. Jabiru is by
> comparison a tiny company that is trying to supply a good engine
> alternative to the Rotax, but it's an uphill battle because they
> don't have the resources compared to Rotax. Then there are the
> Subarus, Corvairs, Geos, etc. Until there is a clear and objective
> standard developed and enforced, these debates are not very
> effective for the novice who is looking for the best package for
> his airplane.
> Check the links below for lots of information on alternative
> engines. Again, this information is only worth the paper it's
> printed on.
> http://home.adelphia.net/~aeroengine/Contents.html
> http://www.aviationlinks.net/activelinks/engines/
> http://www.aerofiles.com/motors.html
> http://www.aviator.cc/engines2.html
>
> Deke Morisse
> Mikado Michigan
> S5/Subaru/CAP 355+ TT
> "Nothing will ever be attempted, if all possible objections must
> first be overcome".- Samuel Johnson
>
>
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: Engine Choices |
Ok, Paul, I see your point. I just saw the task of comparing the
various components that we install, paint on, or otherwise stuff into
our planes as a pretty daunting job, and thought that weighing the
engine would be the simple way to do it.
I gotta admit, though, that when I started to think about building a
plane, cost was a pretty big factor. I had just retired, and knew how
much money I was going to have to play with, and figured I could buy
the plane outright, bring it home, and start (continue) to build it,
and as the monthly pension checks came in, start to decide how many
bean dinners could be substituted for steaks, and then decide on an
engine. Performance figures didn't enter my mind. During this time, I
found a 3-part Kitplanes magazine article that told of one builder's
story, and that's what helped me make a decision.
I'm pretty much a shade-tree mechanic, so this decision process was
in keeping with my level of thinking, and my way of life. Others will
take a different path to the decision-making process, I'm sure, armed
with the information from this list.
Keep up the good work.
Lynn Matteson
Grass Lake, Michigan
Kitfox IV Speedster w/Jabiru 2200
flying w/460+ hrs
On Jan 14, 2008, at 8:35 AM, av8rps wrote:
>
> (Lynn Matteson says "At the risk of becoming annoying (I know, I've
> already passed that milestone), forget the airplanes! Weigh the
> freakin' engines!")
>
> Lynn,
>
> Don't get me wrong. I agree that weighing the complete and flyable
> engine packages would be best. But that would be quite an
> undertaking, not probable to happen anytime soon. Plus, as you
> said earlier it would be difficult to make certain it was done
> without having someones thumb on the scale, so to speak.
>
> So my idea of using averages for various engines and models with
> options and equipment was just to provide those in question with
> that, an average they could expect if they built or bought one
> similar to the ones owners listed.
>
> As an example; With as many 912 powered Kitfoxes out there, and all
> the information that has been shared here on the list, it has
> become pretty easy to come up with an average for a 912 model IV.
> Plain and simple, a 912 model IV as an average will run between 625
> and 675 lbs. Light ones will be in the low 600's, and heavy ones
> in the 700 lb range. It's really as simple as that. I don't know
> about you, but if I was building and considering using a 912 that
> would be helpful information for me.
>
> And if I were torn between the Jab and the 912, and I also knew
> the average for a Jabiru powered Model IV was in the same empty
> weight range, I'd probably start asking owners for performance
> numbers, once again trying to come up with an average of what I
> could expect.
>
> Now if a builder really wanted to get scientific beyond this list
> of averages, having exact engine flying weights would be great.
> From that they could determine horsepower per pound numbers, which
> is really all that is important (unless the weight is just more
> than his airframe was designed for). But better yet, prop thrust
> per pound is the number I'd be looking for. And I'd make sure the
> prop used in the thrust test was appropriate to the airframe I was
> going to install the engine on (E.g.; prop that works good on a
> Sonex probably isn't the best prop for a Kitfox). So once again, I
> agree with your idea that it would be best to have accurate engine
> info in front of anyone trying to make a decision about engine
> choice. Unfortunately, all that information isn't available unless
> some great writer we know (big smile) takes on that arduous task.
>
> But we do have Kitfoxes that are flying with a variety of engines,
> and options right now. So we have the ability to come up with good
> averages for empty weights, as well as performance. So the guy
> that just wants to keep building so he can get in the air as soon
> as possible can do so. He doesn't have to spend hours pouring over
> information, hoping what he thought was correct information works
> out like he planned. We already have gained the experience with
> our Kitfoxes, and have proven results. That can save builders a
> lot of time, and money most likely, while also providing them with
> an engine decision they will be happy with.
>
> And for what it's worth, this is good banter for this list. While
> we might be boring some readers to death, or appear to be arguing
> the Jab vs the 912, I'm certain what has been discussed here has
> already been helping some to better make an engine decision.
>
> Paul Seehafer
>
> --------
> Model IV-1200 912ul Amphib
> Avid Flyer
> Lake Amphibian
> Central Wisconsin
> paul676@tds.net
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=157951#157951
>
>
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: How to increase lift on horizontal stab? |
I have a mk1V stol wing. They are restricted, but Dean suggested to go ahead and
adjust them just above the point of reversal. You can always retract them
if it does reverse. - just waiting for the weather to co operate.
Ref: washout - they must have changed the wing since Dean sold it, as the wing
is too stiff to adjust. Looking at the manual - they glued everything impermanently
to keep the washout in - so I guess that stays.
Hopefully, I'll get the gear extended 6" this week, then test fly. I'd rather
not have to do the airfoiled tail. Remember it's a quest - not a necessity.
larry
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=158000#158000
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: Engine Choices |
At 05:35 AM 1/14/2008, you wrote:
>We already have gained the experience with our Kitfoxes, and have
>proven results.
Actually I believe you already have the results. Because of
the relatively large numbers there is a sort of "natural selection"
process at work in the Kitfox community. If you were to simply add
the numbers of engines of each type in each airframe you would see
the relative "value" of each engine, including all factors. Though it
would seem that new engines would be under-represented, that
under-representation reflects their relatively "unproven" status. As
engines become "proven" they take over the market, as the 912 did
from the 582, and as the Jabiru is presently doing to the Subaru and
VW. (No offense intended. Remember I fly a 582.)
Guy Buchanan
San Diego, CA
K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar.
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: Engine Choices |
Just a reminder of one example of the "natural selection" process at
work:
Recall that Beta came out with a superior tape recording process,
quality-wise, but wasn't able to pack enough tape into the cassette
so that bored housewives could go on vacation for three weeks and
record their favorite soaps each day. VHS won the battle by offering
such a tape at a much lower resolution, thus giving the public what
they wanted. These people were satisfied with mundane quality if it
meant getting their soaps recorded. VHS finally put Beta out of
business, because of sheer numbers, not quality.
(There was a sign that hung in my old workplace that said: "Give the
customer quality, whether they want it or not")
This is by no means a reflection (so far anyway) on the homebuilt
industry, just something to keep in mind when looking at the
"numbers"....remember, if you torture numbers enough, they will tell
you anything. : )
Lynn Matteson
Grass Lake, Michigan
Kitfox IV Speedster w/Jabiru 2200
flying w/460+ hrs
On Jan 14, 2008, at 11:36 AM, Guy Buchanan wrote:
>
> At 05:35 AM 1/14/2008, you wrote:
>> We already have gained the experience with our Kitfoxes, and have
>> proven results.
>
> Actually I believe you already have the results. Because of
> the relatively large numbers there is a sort of "natural selection"
> process at work in the Kitfox community. If you were to simply add
> the numbers of engines of each type in each airframe you would see
> the relative "value" of each engine, including all factors. Though
> it would seem that new engines would be under-represented, that
> under-representation reflects their relatively "unproven" status.
> As engines become "proven" they take over the market, as the 912
> did from the 582, and as the Jabiru is presently doing to the
> Subaru and VW. (No offense intended. Remember I fly a 582.)
>
>
> Guy Buchanan
> San Diego, CA
> K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar.
>
>
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: | Simply the best engines to use |
www.experimentalfuelinjection offers fuel injected engines 914's starting at 15000USD and kit for fuel injection starting at 4500. We offer Fuel injection done right. Standard equipment is a wideband 02 sensor and a 55 amp alternator.
Jason Parker
661 428-1850
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: Engine Choices |
Since we are comparing engines, here is from my annual weight and
balances:
Kitfox 3, pretty much 'vanilla taste' with original tube gear, etc. and
Rotax 582: Empty weight: 236 kg. (520 lbs)
The same but with Jabiru 2200: 241 kg. (531 lbs)
That is only 11 lbs more. But the Jabiru, with 4 cylinders, has a own
CoG that is more forward that the 582. Still, moving the battery from
firewall to behind the seat was all it took to keep the same CoG for
the plane.
Cheers,
Michel Verheughe
Norway
Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200 ... (hum, why do I have a deja-vu? :-)
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 |
|
Anyone have a good solution for heating the cabin in the winter while
flying?
Bruce Oviatt
Email boviatt2@bovardstudio.com
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: | engine selection |
If it is shorter, the dinner will be Moose... the first time you get here!
I'll even provide the first round of Screech!
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Clint Bazzill
Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 10:11 PM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: engine selection
A dinner says your take off will be a lot shorter. Clint
My friend told me once, only fools and crooks bet. Which one am I?
_____
From: noelloveys@yahoo.ca
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: engine selection
I don't know whether to say thank you or not.... I expect that when I
install my 912 I won't get as short a take off as I can with the 582. I do
however expect climb rate once airborne to increase. Cruise speed? Well
the Kitfox, Mod III-A, a modified Mod II with the under cambered wing, isn't
designed to break any speed barriers.
Noel
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Clint Bazzill
Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 3:02 PM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: engine selection
The O-200 is going to come in at least 100 Lbs more then the 912ULS. The
2200 is a joke (I think) many reports out that says that the 2 stroke 582
out climbs the Jabiru 2200. You cannot drive a Kitfox with that little
chunk of wood out front. Before you get involved with hundreds and
hundreds of hours building. Do some research and fly with these different
airplanes. My take is can't get better then a 912ULS. Ivoprop.
When you have to put a 25 lb battery in the tail to balance and sweep wings.
Figure
Locate the Kitfox Pilot's Guide. Part #60000.100 Look at all the aircraft
weights, specifications, add 50 lbs to all their empty weights, that works
out about right. Check with these pilots and fly with them.
Clint
> From: alexandj@preachain.org
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: engine selection
> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 09:43:42 -0800
>
<alexandj@preachain.org>
>
> I'm putting a C-85 into my when I get it. The choice is driven by the fact
> that I have a C-85 on hand - newly overhauled with the O-200 STC (crank
and
> pistons) installed.
>
> I'll be putting a lighter starter and an alternator on it, so that will
free
> up a few pounds.
>
> I've been curious about the Jabiru engines though. They turn up quite a
bit
> faster than the O-200 or C-85 necessitating a smaller prop. How does this
> affect efficiency/performance?
>
> John Alexander
> Currently at sea - SBX-1
>
> On Sat, 12 Jan 2008 05:56:37 -0800 (PST), great bear wrote
> >
> > I have been following the talk on engine choices...just another
> > thought to add....I have a series 5 outback and will have to make an
> > engine choice soon because of wing sweep (or lack of) and would like
> > to know your thoughts on a Jabiru 2200 vs a 0-200 cont. Heres my
> > thinking....the jabiru weighs in at 138 and the 0-200 at
> > 187....ready to go...how much of an even trade is this...50 pounds
> > for 20 hp? Now I guess we can close the weight gap by going light
> > weight starter and alternator by about 12-15 pounds..I am still
> > researching that...I like the simplicity of a direct drive air-
> > cooled engine..how much does the 912 series really weigh when you
> > factor the radiator, hoses, coolant,expansion tank...ect? Does it
> > fall somewhere in this weight range? I had a Cessna 140 for 22 years
> > and changed the 85 hp to an 0-200 and doubled the rate of climb but
> > only gained 2mph in cruise. Since excess hp power is merely the
> > ability to climb faster and cruise is a function of aerodynamics
> > will the weight savings be traded off for horse power? Also can the
> > wings be set at zero sweep and the battery moved to adjust the CG?
> > Just getting started in this as I just bought the Outback and got it
> > home a week ago....still looking it over and wondering what I have
> > gotten myself into here.....If there are any builders who would
> > rather respond off list feel free to contact me direct at
> > av8r2488@yahoo.com Thanks for your advice and help this is a great
> > forum.
> >
> > Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
> > http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
> >
>
>
> --
> Beer is proof that god loves us and wants us to be happy. - Ben
Frank======================
&g=
>
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
arget=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List
p://forums.matronics.com
blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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: Wanted Douglas Wheel(s) |
Just a thought, I sold my old Douglas wheels, and went to Matco 6" split wh
eels and they work great. As for larger tires, you can get them to fit thi
s set up, just an aircraft grade tire.
Ray> From: bjones@dmv.com> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com> Subject: Kitfox-L
ist: RE: Wanted Douglas Wheel(s)> Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 19:19:04 -0500> >
interested in acquiring one or two Douglas wheels for my model IV> Kitfox.
These wheels have three lug holes and brake disc mounting tabs that> Kitfo
x had specially welded on to the basic Douglas wheels at that time> (around
1992) (The tire size is 8.00 x 7 x 20 if that is useful)> Bob Jones> 443-4
======================> > >
_________________________________________________________________
Share life as it happens with the new Windows Live.
http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_sharelife_0120
08
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 |
|
Bruce,
I don't own a plane yet, but I was wondering if a small catalytic heater
might work temporarily. Probably a fire hazard somewhat.
Pete
----- Original Message -----
From: Bruce Oviatt
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 12:56 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: cabin heat
Anyone have a good solution for heating the cabin in the winter while
flying?
Bruce Oviatt
Email boviatt2@bovardstudio.com
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 |
|
Seal up the tail so the air can't come up from the back. The baggage sack
is pretty porous, and a TON of cold air migrates forward from the leaky
area where the elevator attaches. I use heat off the exhaust, and it'll just
about melt your shoes, but the back of the neck gets pretty frosty.
Jeff
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=158091#158091
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: Ignition pb on 582 |
Hi,
New test yesterday, problem appeared again. Now I can say the problem comes from
the sensor. I will remove the engine and check gap between sensor / rotor.
Renaud
--------
Renaud
KitFox IV - 1200. Rotax 582.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=158095#158095
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: Simply the best engines to use |
Or you can have a BMW 1100 S 98 HP at just 3000USD complete with PSRU
and electronic fuel injection.
Jan
Ps, and I don't even sell them.
----- Original Message -----
From: jason Parker
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 8:40 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Simply the best engines to use
www.experimentalfuelinjection offers fuel injected engines 914's
starting at 15000USD and kit for fuel injection starting at 4500. We
offer Fuel injection done right. Standard equipment is a wideband 02
sensor and a 55 amp alternator.
Jason Parker
661 428-1850
__________ NOD32 2789 (20080114) Information __________
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: | engine selection |
Michel:
One other point on the cooling. With an air cooled engine, even an engine
which has only air cooled barrels the size and shape of the spinner can make
a considerable difference to your air cooling efficiency. When i was in
school I was instructed to check design manuals before sending a plane out
without a spinner. Some planes have no problems with not having a spinner
others it is considered very important not only to have a spinner but the
right shape too.
Noel Loveys
AME Intern, RPP
Kitfox III-A, 582,B box
Ivo IFA, Aerocet 1100 floats
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michel
Verheughe
Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 5:51 AM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: engine selection
On Jan 13, 2008, at 2:21 AM, Noel Loveys wrote:
> Did you install a pressure cowl to direct cold air down through the
> cooling
> fins?
I did as much as I can what is done on the Jabiru aircraft, Noel. I use
the Jabiru ram-air ducts with the in-built deflectors. I measured the
openings for the two ducts and the oil cooler from a Jabiru aircraft
then moulded from my own cowling, something that matches exactly that.
I made the opening under the firewall with a 'lip' so that it would
create a low pressure and suck the air through the cowling. As a
result, I never have cylinder temperature problem.
But one must also remember that a propeller is a part of the propulsion
unit. For example, I read that some propeller are good, but not good
for an air-cooled engine because there is not enough pitch at the root
of the blade.
My Scandinavian Jabiru dealer buys both engines and aircraft that he
ships from Australia in containers. He has built many Jabiru aircraft
and I did the right thing: Follow his instructions by the letter. Then,
when the engine was installed, I flew my Kitfox to the other side of
Norway, where he lives, and showed it the engine. Apart from a couple
of small details, he said: "Good job, lad!"
Cheers,
Michel Verheughe
Norway
Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200
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: Maximum Miles Per Gallon in a Kitfox? |
They are probably in the basement lying right next to mine J
(hmmm.... where did I put those landing gears and wheels????)
Paul Seehafer
--------
Model IV-1200 912ul Amphib
Avid Flyer
Lake Amphibian
Central Wisconsin
paul676@tds.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=157877#157877
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: | Battery Location |
Kitfoxers, I am rebuilding a Model 3 that had a 912 engine and 2 @13
gallon wing tanks. At least I think they are 13 gals as that is the only
wing tank option I am familiar with. The fuel header tank is about 18
inches behind the seat back.The battery was installed about 2 feet
behind the seat back on the fusalage. I am installing a 582 Rotax. My
question is, should I move the battery to the back of the firewall,
where I see some other 582 engine battery installations?
Pat Reilly
Rockford, Illinois
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: Battery Location |
Based on the published info, the 912 weighs at least 25# more than the 582. Thus
the rearward battery placement. I have mine on the firewall, cabin side. I'd
say your guess is right on.
Pat Reilly <patreilly43@hotmail.com> wrote: Kitfoxers, I am rebuilding
a Model 3 that had a 912 engine and 2 @13 gallon wing tanks. At least I think
they are 13 gals as that is the only wing tank option I am familiar with. The
fuel header tank is about 18 inches behind the seat back.The battery was installed
about 2 feet behind the seat back on the fusalage. I am installing a 582
Rotax. My question is, should I move the battery to the back of the firewall,
where I see some other 582 engine battery installations?
Pat Reilly
Rockford, Illinois
Marco Menezes
Model 2 582 N99KX
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
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: Battery Location |
Hey Pat,
I'm just down the road in Genoa. Check out Ramme (IL0)that's a zero. We have
about 10 airplanes here. The runway is N/S 2400'. Come see us or give me a
call 815-784-3476.
I would suggest looking at your current weight and balance. If it is not near
the aft limit, then I would leave the battery where it is. The airplanes tend
to be on the nose heavy side. They fly much better with the cg aft of center,
but of course within the envelope.
Do call,
larry
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=158180#158180
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 |
|
Just started lurking here. I'm going to be going to the factory for a tour and
possible order a Super Sport. One question I have is what is the approx. build
time on Kit Foxes?
--------
Jorge Fernandez
N214JL Reserved
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=158181#158181
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: | Re: How to increase lift on horizontal stab? |
Larry:
Are you putting pipe into the gear legs or bigger tires?? Bigger tires
could open up lots more fun!
Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of LarryM
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 12:40 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: How to increase lift on horizontal stab?
I have a mk1V stol wing. They are restricted, but Dean suggested to go
ahead and adjust them just above the point of reversal. You can always
retract them if it does reverse. - just waiting for the weather to co
operate.
Ref: washout - they must have changed the wing since Dean sold it, as the
wing is too stiff to adjust. Looking at the manual - they glued everything
impermanently to keep the washout in - so I guess that stays.
Hopefully, I'll get the gear extended 6" this week, then test fly. I'd
rather not have to do the airfoiled tail. Remember it's a quest - not a
necessity.
larry
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=158000#158000
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: | Re: Kitfox-List Digest: 31 Msgs - 12/19/07 |
Listers,
?? I have a classic 4 and am approaching a move for my work.? I have a long way
to go and intend to trailer the airplane.? Has anyone tried to design a cover
to protect the inside of the aircraft while riding on a trailer?? The area vacated
when the turtledeck is removed is exposed to the open air when folded.?
Any experience with this???
Thanks!
Rique
Classic 4
582
-----Original Message-----
From: Kitfox-List Digest Server <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Thu, 20 Dec 2007 2:58 am
Subject: Kitfox-List Digest: 31 Msgs - 12/19/07
*
=================================================
Online Versions of Today's List Digest Archive
=================================================
Today's complete Kitfox-List Digest can also be found in either of the
two Web Links listed below. The .html file includes the Digest formatted
in HTML for viewing with a web browser and features Hyperlinked Indexes
and Message Navigation. The .txt file includes the plain ASCII version
of the Kitfox-List Digest and can be viewed with a generic text editor
such as Notepad or with a web browser.
HTML Version:
http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=html&Chapter 07-12-19&Archive=Kitfox
Text Version:
http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=txt&Chapter 07-12-19&Archive=Kitfox
===============================================
EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive
===============================================
----------------------------------------------------------
Kitfox-List Digest Archive
---
Total Messages Posted Wed 12/19/07: 31
----------------------------------------------------------
Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:22 AM - Re: resending: Help-582 ignition fault (R & L Ainsworth)
2. 04:39 AM - Re: new member to the list (RRTRACK@aol.com)
3. 05:24 AM - Short Changing Ourselves!! (RAY Gignac)
4. 06:15 AM - Short Changing Ourselves!! (fox5flyer)
5. 07:05 AM - Re: Short Changing Ourselves!! (Randy Lervold)
6. 07:34 AM - Re: Bush tires: Kitfox3 on Nankang Tires (Charles Boccaccio)
7. 07:59 AM - Re: Short Changing Ourselves!! (dave)
8. 08:16 AM - Re: Bush tires: Kitfox3 on Nankang Tires (Charles Boccaccio)
9. 08:33 AM - Bush tires: Kitfox3 on Nankang Tires (fox5flyer)
10. 08:45 AM - Skiplane flight...off topic (Lynn Matteson)
11. 09:06 AM - Re: Test Fit Needed Mid Atlantic Area (Mdkitfox@aol.com)
12. 09:10 AM - Re: Merry Christmas (Mdkitfox@aol.com)
13. 12:37 PM - Re: Skiplane flight...off topic (Jim_and_Lucy Chuk)
14. 01:08 PM - Re: Short Changing Ourselves!! (darinh)
15. 01:08 PM - Re: Bush tires: Kitfox3 on Nankang Tires (Lowell Fitt)
16. 01:42 PM - Re: Short Changing Ourselves!! (Dan Billingsley)
17. 01:44 PM - Re: Skiplane flight...off topic (Lynn Matteson)
18. 03:18 PM - Re: Short Changing Ourselves!! (kitfoxmike)
19. 03:22 PM - Re: Short Changing Ourselves!! (kitfoxmike)
20. 03:24 PM - Short Changing Ourselves! (RAY Gignac)
21. 04:15 PM - Re: For Sale (Robert Simon)
22. 05:39 PM - Re: Bush tires: Kitfox3 on Nankang Tires (kitfoxmike)
23. 06:10 PM - Re: Short Changing Ourselves!! (ronlee)
24. 06:33 PM - Re: Short Changing Ourselves!! (dave)
25. 06:37 PM - Re: For Sale (dave)
26. 07:04 PM - Re: Re: Short Changing Ourselves!! (Dan Billingsley)
27. 07:11 PM - Re: Re: Short Changing Ourselves!! (Kevin Cozik)
28. 07:28 PM - Any Winter Flying Tips (jareds)
29. 08:14 PM - Re: Re: For Sale (Steve Magdic)
30. 09:16 PM - Re: Any Winter Flying Tips (Jim_and_Lucy Chuk)
31. 11:51 PM - Re: Skiplane flight...off topic (Michel Verheughe)
________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________
Time: 01:22:50 AM PST US
From: "R & L Ainsworth" <rainsworth@xtra.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: resending: Help-582 ignition fault
Thanks to those who replied to my post re ignition. I do not have a tiny
tach but I will look into getting one.
Russell Ainsworth Mod 4 1050 ZK-KIV NEW ZEALAND
Do not archive.
________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________
Time: 04:39:36 AM PST US
From: RRTRACK@aol.com
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: new member to the list
Yes, register as an Experimental Home Built with 1320# gross or less and
without the IFA prop or anything else that would disqualify your plane from the
LSA category. Registering the plane as an E-LSA is no longer an option as the
deadline soon arrives. (unless they change the deadline of Jan 31, 2008)
Mark
Kitfox 5 Vixen
912UL IVO
Hartford, Wisconsin
(http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004)
________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________
Time: 05:24:08 AM PST US
From: RAY Gignac <kitfoxpilot@msn.com>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Short Changing Ourselves!!
I am not trying to stir up problems on the list, I just wanted to throw thi
s out as a general question. Why is it that the Kitfox community/builders/
owners sell these fine aircraft so cheap? to me it is like a forclosure, y
ou sell a Fox for say $13,000, $18,000 or even $21,000 when in fact it shou
ld be worth $35,000 to $40,000 maybe even more! this just makes it bad for
other Kitfox builders/Owers who might try to sell there fine craft, and ser
iously under values our planes! When you look at the other LSA aircraft on
the used market say a CH701 which are listed at $40,000 or others which i
s in the ball park compared to new LSA going for $55,000 and up! is the Ki
tfox the YUGO of LSA's or is it the BMW which is quality.
Ray
_________________________________________________________________
Get the power of Windows + Web with the new Windows Live.
http://www.windowslive.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_powerofwindows_122007
________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________
Time: 06:15:02 AM PST US
From: "fox5flyer" <fox5flyer@idealwifi.net>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Short Changing Ourselves!!
Ray, this topic comes and goes. Basically, in my opinion, it's nothing
more than "the market sets the price". In other words, one sells his
airplane for whatever he/she can get. There are many variables
involved, ie., how motivated the seller is, model, engine, panel,
quality of build, damage history, location, overall condition, hangared,
etc. You see a lot of experimental airplanes on Barnstormers, etc
asking 55k+ (for example), but that doesn't mean they're getting that
much in the end. Price it low and it sells quickly. Price it too high
and it won't sell. Sure some folks make a profit on their airplanes,
but the truth be known, I doubt that very many of the builders actually
get back what they have in them. That isn't a Kitfox problem. It's the
experimental market. When I sold my Model II, I got pretty close to
what I had in it and I was satisfied because I flew it for nearly 400
hours and that counts for a lot.
Just my opinion.
Deke
S5 NE Michigan
----- Original Message -----
From: RAY Gignac
To: kitfox-list
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 8:23 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Short Changing Ourselves!!
I am not trying to stir up problems on the list, I just wanted to
throw this out as a general question. Why is it that the Kitfox
community/builders/owners sell these fine aircraft so cheap? to me it
is like a forclosure, you sell a Fox for say $13,000, $18,000 or even
$21,000 when in fact it should be worth $35,000 to $40,000 maybe even
more! this just makes it bad for other Kitfox builders/Owers who might
try to sell there fine craft, and seriously under values our planes!
When you look at the other LSA aircraft on the used market say a CH701
which are listed at $40,000 or others which is in the ball park
compared to new LSA going for $55,000 and up! is the Kitfox the YUGO of
LSA's or is it the BMW which is quality.
Ray
________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________
Time: 07:05:40 AM PST US
From: "Randy Lervold" <randy@romeolima.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Short Changing Ourselves!!
I'm considering starting a Super Sport and have been wondering the same
thing regarding resale value. Having built two RVs, and being familiar
with that market, I know that you can almost always get more than you
have into a flying aircraft, so long as the equipment and build quality
are at least average. In checking around though it seems that with most
other kit aircraft you are lucky to recoup your hard costs. For the
later 912 equipped Kitfoxes, what is typical resale versus what is
invested?
Randy Lervold
Camas, WA
www.rv-3.com
www.rv-8.com
----- Original Message -----
From: fox5flyer
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 6:13 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Short Changing Ourselves!!
Ray, this topic comes and goes. Basically, in my opinion, it's
nothing more than "the market sets the price". In other words, one
sells his airplane for whatever he/she can get. There are many
variables involved, ie., how motivated the seller is, model, engine,
panel, quality of build, damage history, location, overall condition,
hangared, etc. You see a lot of experimental airplanes on Barnstormers,
etc asking 55k+ (for example), but that doesn't mean they're getting
that much in the end. Price it low and it sells quickly. Price it too
high and it won't sell. Sure some folks make a profit on their
airplanes, but the truth be known, I doubt that very many of the
builders actually get back what they have in them. That isn't a Kitfox
problem. It's the experimental market. When I sold my Model II, I got
pretty close to what I had in it and I was satisfied because I flew it
for nearly 400 hours and that counts for a lot.
Just my opinion.
Deke
S5 NE Michigan
----- Original Message -----
From: RAY Gignac
To: kitfox-list
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 8:23 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Short Changing Ourselves!!
I am not trying to stir up problems on the list, I just wanted to
throw this out as a general question. Why is it that the Kitfox
community/builders/owners sell these fine aircraft so cheap? to me it
is like a forclosure, you sell a Fox for say $13,000, $18,000 or even
$21,000 when in fact it should be worth $35,000 to $40,000 maybe even
more! this just makes it bad for other Kitfox builders/Owers who might
try to sell there fine craft, and seriously under values our planes!
When you look at the other LSA aircraft on the used market say a CH701
which are listed at $40,000 or others which is in the ball park
compared to new LSA going for $55,000 and up! is the Kitfox the YUGO of
LSA's or is it the BMW which is quality.
Ray
________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________
Time: 07:34:46 AM PST US
From: Charles Boccaccio <charlieboccaccio@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Bush tires: Kitfox3 on Nankang Tires
Hi Greg:
I ordered the tires from Tiresunlimited.com
The tire size is 21 x 12 - 8. The model number is N800 and the part number is
T30151002, they cost $27.64 each plus shipping. They'll arrive tied together
and it's a little tricky getting the tires mounted since they are collapsed and
don't seal against the rim. I tied a tourniquet around the periphery of the
tire and this forced the inner tire to mont on the rim and hold the 5 PSI the
tires need to roll your Kitfox.
So far I have about 60 landings on the tires and they have been a joy. Expect
a very mild jolt when you touch down on asphalt, since there is a lot of tire
that has to get spinning, but landing on grass or gravel is is always a charm.
On a tail dragger, your prop will have about two extra inches of clerance. I
cannot say how much cruise speed has been effected by the new tires, but what
ever it is, it's minor. The tires wiegh the same as the original tires the kit
came with.
Charlie
GONER752@aol.com wrote:
Charlie,
Could you provide some specifics? Size, price, source?
Thanks,
Greg G.
Macedon, N.Y.
23NK
n375KL
Mod 2
582
do not archive
---------------------------------
---------------------------------
________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________
Time: 07:59:38 AM PST US
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Short Changing Ourselves!!
From: "dave" <dave@cfisher.com>
Sad but true that you will lose 50% of your cash outlay on a Kitplane in many
cases.
I said many times that Kitfoxes are CHEAP CHHEAP CHEAP !!!!
look at Challengers selling for over 30k with a 503 and a Kitfox IV with 912
selling
for 22k . HEll of a deal.
With a used market like this , is makes it harder to build a new one from
investment
point of view plus you can fly now for less than 1/2 of the price. Now
a few of us have agreed that the Kitfox Market has likely bottomed out and maybe
they will appreciate from here.?
--------
Rotax Dealer, Ontario Canada
Flying Videos and Kitfox Info
http://www.cfisher.com/
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=153093#153093
________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________
Time: 08:16:17 AM PST US
From: Charles Boccaccio <charlieboccaccio@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Bush tires: Kitfox3 on Nankang Tires
Jeff:
Max gross for the Grove landing gear on the Kitfox3 is 1,200 Lbs.
The tires are rated to only 355 lbs at 5 PSI, so I keep my gross weight to no
more then 710 Lbs.
Charlie
jeff puls <pulsair@mindspring.com> wrote:
Charlie,
What kind of useful load do you have with the tires and Grove gear? Jeff
Classic
IV
----- Original Message -----
From: Charles Boccaccio
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 3:01 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Bush tires: Kitfox3 on Nankang Tires
A few months ago there was talk on the list about bush tires on Kitfoxes.
Please find attached a picture of my KF3 with Nankang tires. I've rolled the
plane up to 45MPH (well above normal operating speed) and they roll just fine
and landings are a little more forgiving.
Charlie
Kitfox 3
---------------------------------
---------------------------------
________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________
Time: 08:33:39 AM PST US
From: "fox5flyer" <fox5flyer@idealwifi.net>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Bush tires: Kitfox3 on Nankang Tires
Is that the same tire that was marketed as Kingfox. ??
Deke
S5 NE Michigan
----- Original Message -----
From: Charles Boccaccio
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:26 AM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Bush tires: Kitfox3 on Nankang Tires
Hi Greg:
I ordered the tires from Tiresunlimited.com
The tire size is 21 x 12 - 8. The model number is N800 and the part
number is T30151002, they cost $27.64 each plus shipping. They'll arrive
tied together and it's a little tricky getting the tires mounted since
they are collapsed and don't seal against the rim. I tied a tourniquet
around the periphery of the tire and this forced the inner tire to mont
on the rim and hold the 5 PSI the tires need to roll your Kitfox.
So far I have about 60 landings on the tires and they have been a joy.
Expect a very mild jolt when you touch down on asphalt, since there is a
lot of tire that has to get spinning, but landing on grass or gravel is
is always a charm. On a tail dragger, your prop will have about two
extra inches of clerance. I cannot say how much cruise speed has been
effected by the new tires, but what ever it is, it's minor. The tires
wiegh the same as the original tires the kit came with.
Charlie
GONER752@aol.com wrote:
Charlie,
Could you provide some specifics? Size, price, source?
Thanks,
Greg G.
Macedon, N.Y.
23NK
n375KL
Mod 2
582
do not archive
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________
Time: 08:45:01 AM PST US
From: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Skiplane flight...off topic
Just made my first skiplane (Kitfox IV/Jabiru 2200 w/skis) flight of
the season. Eight to ten inches of snow on the field, but my hangar
neighbor had cleared out the area in front of mine, so I got it out
and turned and hangar doors closed before startup. (I learned my
lesson from last year's mistake of leaving them open and finding snow
all over everything upon return.) A couple of 2 foot drifts were
handled nicely...up and over...and the taxi to the far end of the
1700-foot field was with about 1500-2200 rpm to keep it moving. Made
the mag check while taxiing, turned just fine and started the run. It
was slow going at first, then the skis climbed up a bit on top of
snow, speed picked up and off I went. Flew to a field nearby(3NP),
landed, taxied a bit, shut down, had coffee, fired up and left
without incident. There were drifts at Napoleon (3NP) too, but the
'fox handled 'em with ease, and I got off there too, but carrying a
bunch of snow up with me, on the skis....most blew off later. Landed
at home field by holding off on touchdown until close to hangar area,
then dropped her in...didn't want to have to taxi too far. Would have
flown more but ceiling was low, and didn't want to chance flying to
JXN for fuel and run into less-than-VFR.
Lynn Matteson
Grass Lake, Michigan
Kitfox IV Speedster w/Jabiru 2200
flying w/440+ hrs
do not archive
________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________
Time: 09:06:02 AM PST US
From: Mdkitfox@aol.com
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Test Fit Needed Mid Atlantic Area
I'm about 6 feet and the same weight. I have flown the IV and while it is
snug, especially with another person on board. It would not be very c
omfortable for a long trip. The Series V (and up) is a much better fit for a
big
guy. I don't know anyone near Dover to give you a test flight, but Ray G., if
you're reading this you might know someone who can help this person out.
Rick Weiss
Series V Speedster - N39RW, 912S Power
DO NOT ARCHIVE
In a message dated 12/18/2007 11:58:19 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
rklarich@msn.com writes:
Hello,
I'm 6'1 and 230# and found out I should get a test fit in a KF 3 or 4 before
diving into a purchase- anyone that can help? 19934 zip code, near Dover,
DE.
Thanks!
(http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004)
________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________
Time: 09:10:41 AM PST US
From: Mdkitfox@aol.com
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Merry Christmas
The ladies and gentlemen on this list are the finest folks on the planet and
it's our wish that you have a very Merry Christmas and happy, healthy new
year. Fly safe in 08. :-)
Rick Weiss
Series V Speedster - N39RW, 912S Power
DO NOT ARCHIVE
(http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004)
________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________
Time: 12:37:22 PM PST US
From: Jim_and_Lucy Chuk <thesupe@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Skiplane flight...off topic
Hi Lynn, I love the skis also, Just be careful of slush if you land on th
e frozen lakes. My new prop should be here today. Do you pull a drag up an
d down the field to pack the snow? I've been doing that for about 5 years
on my strip and I think I have finally come up with a drag that really work
s. If you want, I could describe it and post a picture. Jim Chuk Avid MK
IV Mn> From: lynnmatt@jps.net> Subject: Kitfox-List: Skiplane flight...o
ff topic> Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 11:44:29 -0500> To: kitfox-list@matronics.
> Just made my first skiplane (Kitfox IV/Jabiru 2200 w/skis) flight of > t
he season. Eight to ten inches of snow on the field, but my hangar > neighb
or had cleared out the area in front of mine, so I got it out > and turned
and hangar doors closed before startup. (I learned my > lesson from last ye
ar's mistake of leaving them open and finding snow > all over everything up
on return.) A couple of 2 foot drifts were > handled nicely...up and over..
.and the taxi to the far end of the > 1700-foot field was with about 1500-2
200 rpm to keep it moving. Made > the mag check while taxiing, turned just
fine and started the run. It > was slow going at first, then the skis climb
ed up a bit on top of > snow, speed picked up and off I went. Flew to a fie
ld nearby(3NP), > landed, taxied a bit, shut down, had coffee, fired up and
left > without incident. There were drifts at Napoleon (3NP) too, but the
> 'fox handled 'em with ease, and I got off there too, but carrying a > bun
ch of snow up with me, on the skis....most blew off later. Landed > at home
field by holding off on touchdown until close to hangar area, > then dropp
ed her in...didn't want to have to taxi too far. Would have > flown more bu
t ceiling was low, and didn't want to chance flying to > JXN for fuel and r
un into less-than-VFR.> > Lynn Matteson> Grass Lake, Michigan> Kitfox IV Sp
========================> _
======================> > >
_________________________________________________________________
The best games are on Xbox 360. Click here for a special offer on an Xbox
360 Console.
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/wheretobuy/
________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________
Time: 01:08:08 PM PST US
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Short Changing Ourselves!!
From: "darinh" <gerns25@netscape.net>
The market on the RVs is a completely different animal altogether than most
other
experimental markets...you can actually recoup if not make money on a flying
RV. The way I see it with the kitfox is that if you decide to build one, it
is not based on the resale value, it is based on the flying qualities and the
fun factor...it is hard to beat a Kitfox for the type of flying it was designed
for. Having said that, resale is always a consideration but I figure if I
have to sell it down the road, I will get what I get and chock the loss up to
a ton of fun flying hours in the plane. I know I will never get even close to
what I have in my plane back out of it but I don't plan on selling...if life
makes me, well then I guess I will deal with that then. By the way, has anyone
checked the prices of new Rotax engines? A 912s is over $18k! Prices like
these should increase the value of our Kitfoxes to some extent.
--------
Darin Hawkes
Series 7 (under Construction)
914 Turbo
Ogden, Utah
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=153131#153131
________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________
Time: 01:08:54 PM PST US
From: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Bush tires: Kitfox3 on Nankang Tires
Charlie,
I think you might be underestimating the Nankang tires. I flew with them on
my Model IV for about three years and never hesitated to fly at 1200 lbs.
This flying included lots of off pavement landings. I suspect the tires are
rated as they are because they are designed for the ATV market where rough
terrain at fairly high speeds is common. After my chrash landing, which
tore the aluminum spring gear off the airplane, one of the Nankang tires was
still inflated and the other was flat. I didn't have time to carefully
examine the flattened tire to determine why it lost air.
I am not suggesting abusing any of the equipment we use, but in this case, I
think in the normal use of these tires on our airplanes, they are fine up to
the rated weight of the airframe in the earlier models.
Yes, these were the tires sold as Kingfox.
Lowell
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles Boccaccio" <charlieboccaccio@yahoo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 8:14 AM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Bush tires: Kitfox3 on Nankang Tires
> Jeff:
>
> Max gross for the Grove landing gear on the Kitfox3 is 1,200 Lbs.
>
> The tires are rated to only 355 lbs at 5 PSI, so I keep my gross weight
> to no more then 710 Lbs.
>
> Charlie
>
> jeff puls <pulsair@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Charlie,
> What kind of useful load do you have with the tires and Grove gear? Jeff
> Classic IV
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Charles Boccaccio
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 3:01 PM
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Bush tires: Kitfox3 on Nankang Tires
>
>
> A few months ago there was talk on the list about bush tires on Kitfoxes.
>
> Please find attached a picture of my KF3 with Nankang tires. I've rolled
> the plane up to 45MPH (well above normal operating speed) and they roll
> just fine and landings are a little more forgiving.
>
> Charlie
> Kitfox 3
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Search.
________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________
Time: 01:42:15 PM PST US
From: Dan Billingsley <dan@azshowersolutions.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Short Changing Ourselves!!
Randy,
You bring up a good point as well as a question. Why is it with an RV you can
re-coup your investment and with a Kitfox, as it stands now...you will loose?
I can answer that question...because the Kitfox community has allowed it. I
am currently building a very modified IV and I know I will be very happy with
it when it's finished. I will have close to $50,000 in it when all is said and
done and it dose grind on me that the market has the mindset it does.
When I was up at the factory fly-in this last year I had this discussion with
John McBean and he made a statement that I hope takes hold. Correct me if I get
this wrong John...but he said once the aviation comunity starts looking at
the newer Kitfoxes for what they are...then that old mindset should go away.
These newer planes ARE a high performance ride when you place a 912s out front
then add in-flight adjustable props, electric trim, glass panels, etc...These
make for one nice plane and are not comparable to the older generation Kitfoxes.
Now I don't want to get into a pissing match with someone that has an older
plane...I will be the first to say that I have seen workmanship on older planes
that should bring in big bucks in re-sale...alot has to do with the workmanship.
My point is simply this...these planes need to be purchased and looked
at on an individual basis. If you have never flown in one of the new foxes, you
need to try one on before you scoff. Until the sellers start to hold their
own in a buyers market, we may never see the change we all would like to see.
It will be up to the Kitfox community to take this stand. Looks like I found my
soapbox.
Dan Billingsley
Mesa, AZ
http://www.azshowersolutions.com/Kitfox1.html
Randy Lervold <randy@romeolima.com> wrote:
.hmmessage P { PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px;
MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px } BODY.hmmessage { FONT-SIZE: 10pt;
FONT-FAMILY:
Tahoma } I'm considering starting a Super Sport and have been wondering
the same thing regarding resale value. Having built two RVs, and being
familiar with that market, I know that you can almost always get more than you
have into a flying aircraft, so long as the equipment and build quality are
at least average. In checking around though it seems that with most other kit
aircraft you are lucky to recoup your hard costs. For the later 912 equipped
Kitfoxes, what is typical resale versus what is invested?
Randy Lervold
Camas, WA
www.rv-3.com
www.rv-8.com
----- Original Message -----
From: fox5flyer
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 6:13 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Short Changing Ourselves!!
Ray, this topic comes and goes. Basically, in my opinion, it's nothing more
than "the market sets the price". In other words, one sells his airplane for
whatever he/she can get. There are many variables involved, ie., how motivated
the seller is, model, engine, panel, quality of build, damage history, location,
overall condition, hangared, etc. You see a lot of experimental airplanes
on Barnstormers, etc asking 55k+ (for example), but that doesn't mean they're
getting that much in the end. Price it low and it sells quickly. Price it
too high and it won't sell. Sure some folks make a profit on their airplanes,
but the truth be known, I doubt that very many of the builders actually get back
what they have in them. That isn't a Kitfox problem. It's the experimental
market. When I sold my Model II, I got pretty close to what I had in it and
I was satisfied because I flew it for nearly 400 hours and that counts for a
lot.
Just my opinion.
Deke
S5 NE Michigan
----- Original Message -----
From: RAY Gignac
To: kitfox-list
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 8:23 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Short Changing Ourselves!!
I am not trying to stir up problems on the list, I just wanted to throw this out
as a general question. Why is it that the Kitfox community/builders/owners
sell these fine aircraft so cheap? to me it is like a forclosure, you sell a
Fox for say $13,000, $18,000 or even $21,000 when in fact it should be worth
$35,000
to $40,000 maybe even more! this just makes it bad for other Kitfox
builders/Owers
who might try to sell there fine craft, and seriously under values
our planes! When you look at the other LSA aircraft on the used market say a
CH701 which are listed at $40,000 or others which is in the ball park compared
to new LSA going for $55,000 and up! is the Kitfox the YUGO of LSA's or is
it the BMW which is quality.
Ray
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/chref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matronhref="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________
Time: 01:44:08 PM PST US
From: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Skiplane flight...off topic
I'm still waiting for the lakes to become safe enough. Today's
flights...I went up again for a fuel run...were interesting. After a
load of fuel (26 gals. total) was in, no problem with TO at paved
field, but getting off from subsequent (non-packed) grass field was
WAY longer than this mornings' flight...and landing there was a bear
too. As soon as the tail touched (first), the mains then touched, and
the tail came up pretty good. That stuff is really deep and wet.
Ambient was about 35 F at the time, and had been for a few hours. So
the snow became sluggish and hard to push through. As I said, taking
off took about half of the 2400-some foot runway...I just had to wait
until it bounced enough to stay up out of the snow for a little bit,
and it was flying. Landing at home field was again a breeze (wind of
11 mph, gusts of 19, 60 degrees off right side) and I could carry the
plane just off the runway until I wanted to let it down.
Yes, I'd like to see your drag, Jim. Might get others interested, too.
Lynn Matteson
Grass Lake, Michigan
Kitfox IV Speedster w/Jabiru 2200
flying w/440+ hrs
do not archive
On Dec 19, 2007, at 3:32 PM, Jim_and_Lucy Chuk wrote:
> Hi Lynn, I love the skis also, Just be careful of slush if you
> land on the frozen lakes. My new prop should be here today. Do you
> pull a drag up and down the field to pack the snow? I've been
> doing that for about 5 years on my strip and I think I have finally
> come up with a drag that really works. If you want, I could
> describe it and post a picture. Jim Chuk Avid MK IV Mn
>
> > From: lynnmatt@jps.net
> > Subject: Kitfox-List: Skiplane flight...off topic
> > Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 11:44:29 -0500
> > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> >
> >
> > Just made my first skiplane (Kitfox IV/Jabiru 2200 w/skis) flight of
> > the season. Eight to ten inches of snow on the field, but my hangar
> > neighbor had cleared out the area in front of mine, so I got it out
> > and turned and hangar doors closed before startup. (I learned my
> > lesson from last year's mistake of leaving them open and finding
> snow
> > all over everything upon return.) A couple of 2 foot drifts were
> > handled nicely...up and over...and the taxi to the far end of the
> > 1700-foot field was with about 1500-2200 rpm to keep it moving. Made
> > the mag check while taxiing, turned just fine and started the
> run. It
> > was slow going at first, then the skis climbed up a bit on top of
> > snow, speed picked up and off I went. Flew to a field nearby(3NP),
> > landed, taxied a bit, shut down, had coffee, fired up and left
> > without incident. There were drifts at Napoleon (3NP) too, but the
> > 'fox handled 'em with ease, and I got off there too, but carrying a
> > bunch of snow up with me, on the skis....most blew off later. Landed
> > at home field by holding off on touchdown until close to hangar
> area,
> > then dropped her in...didn't want to have to taxi too far. Would
> have
> > flown more but ceiling was low, and didn't want to chance flying to
> > JXN for fuel and run into less-than-VFR.
> >
> > Lynn Matteson
> > Grass Lake, Michigan
> > Kitfox IV Speedster w/Jabiru 2200
> > flying w/440+ hrs
> > do not archive
> >
> >
> >
> &===================
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> The best games are on Xbox 360. Click here for a special offer on
> an Xbox 360 Console. Get it now!_-
> ============================================================ _-
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List_-
> ============================================================ _-
> forums.matronics.com_-
> ==========================================================
________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________
Time: 03:18:43 PM PST US
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Short Changing Ourselves!!
From: "kitfoxmike" <customtrans@qwest.net>
Hummmm.... those old kitfoxes. Well mine is an old one. It's light, white, and
quite. My perfect airplane for pure fun. Sure I don't want to take it on a
loooong ride. But the short ones, it can't be beat. I to think about the
resale.
with the tt being over 1000 now. I look it this way. I flew 400 flights
so far this year, still flying. 300 hours, still counting. If I were to rent
a cessna at 110 an hour. that comes to 33000 dollars. OUCH!! My cost for
the fuel was somewhere around 3500 dollars. I had the cheapest fun imaginable.
Will I ever sell, I'm thinking no. I'm building a rv7, that's for the long
cross country flights, so I guess I'll be looking for a hanger for the 7 and
keep the kitfox in it's current hanger. Money, not a factor, I have plenty.
so I mainly am looking for what makes ME happy and the kitfox does just that,
the rv will also.
--------
kitfoxmike
model IV, 1200
speedster
912ul
building
RV7a
slowbuild wings, fuse, finish kit
"if you're not getting razzed from pilots or the FAA then you're not flying
enough"
Do not archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=153149#153149
________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________
Time: 03:22:11 PM PST US
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Short Changing Ourselves!!
From: "kitfoxmike" <customtrans@qwest.net>
One thing I forgot. It's not what you have in the airplane that counts.
gadgets.
It's how light it is, how white it is and how quite is important as well,
that's for those pilots that seem to want to turn in everybody under the sun.
But light should be the priority because the airplane will fly different with
all the junk on board. My Rv will be minimal vfr with a 496 hand held and of
course a radio, I have leather seats with heat, had to keep the wife happy,
other than that, very basic.
--------
kitfoxmike
model IV, 1200
speedster
912ul
building
RV7a
slowbuild wings, fuse, finish kit
"if you're not getting razzed from pilots or the FAA then you're not flying
enough"
Do not archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=153152#153152
________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________
Time: 03:24:01 PM PST US
From: RAY Gignac <kitfoxpilot@msn.com>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Short Changing Ourselves!
I did not mean to open a can of worms, or to revisit the past, or to pour s
alt in an old wound! but I like the responses so far. Look, I'm not tryin
g to compare a Kitfox to an RV, or trying to recoup builders value. I know
folks will sell there fine machines far less than what they may be worth a
fter all we have no KELLY'S BLUE BOOK VALUE and dollars talk! with the gro
wing LSA market and all the new aircraft I just see our Kitfox planes worth
much more than what they are being offered at. This is by far a fun plane
to fly.
Ray Gignac N2BH
Model IV, 1200
912S
_________________________________________________________________
Don't get caught with egg on your face. Play Chicktionary!
http://club.live.com/chicktionary.aspx?icid=chick_wlhmtextlink1_dec
________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________
Time: 04:15:42 PM PST US
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: For Sale
From: Robert Simon <bigbob196@juno.com>
Steve,
You make no mention of a cabin heater? I would like to see pictures?
Over,and out Vieux Bob
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 16:31:57 -0600 "Steve Magdic" <stevemagdic@wi.rr.com>
writes:
Due to financial concerns I have to put my KitFox up for sale. It's a
model 3 with the Model 4 wing. I thought I'd offer it to the Matronics
KitFox group before I post
it on Barnstormers or some other web based selling platform. I figure it
will be in good hands if someone here decided to purchase it. I'll post
some pics soon.
Here's the description:
FOR SALE
KitFox Model 3 With Model 4 Wing (Droop Tips)
Registered Experimental
Rotax 912 UL - 400 Hrs. Engine and Airframe
3 Blade Warp Prop (Overhauled in 07)
20 Gallon Fuel
New 3 Leaf Tail Spring with Soft Rubber Tail Wheel
Cargo Pod
Snow Skis with all Hardware and ReTrax (Ski Mounted) Retractable Roller
Wheels For Moving Aircraft Across Hard Surface/Hanger
Left Side Toe Brakes Only
New Glass - 06/07
All Service Bulletins Complied With
Condition Inspection 11/07
Complete Builders Logs, Construction Manuals with Photos Included
Engine and Airframe Log Books Up To Date and Included
Standard VFR Panel
Needs Nothing - Buy It And Fly It
Asking $21,500
Contact: Steve Magdic
stevemagdic@wi.rr.com (preferred)
Home: 262-820-9938
Cell: 262-370-3182
________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________
Time: 05:39:09 PM PST US
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Bush tires: Kitfox3 on Nankang Tires
From: "kitfoxmike" <customtrans@qwest.net>
They look just like the kingfox tires I put on this year. I load them right up
to 1200 gross on the plane. I took mine to the motorcycle guys and let them
install along with balancing them. I run them up to 60mph at times for some
exciting
wheel landings and wheelies(run on one wheel). No problems with shake.
I've put about 5000 touch and goes on these things this year alone, they still
look great. I wanted to try them out in the snow on the grass runway, but
the airport closed it and wouldn't let me land on it. They sure know how to
make a grown man cry sometimes don't they. I had to settle for a runway that
was with packed snow and ice, did a bunch of wheel landings with stop and goes.
That was fun.
--------
kitfoxmike
model IV, 1200
speedster
912ul
building
RV7a
slowbuild wings, fuse, finish kit
"if you're not getting razzed from pilots or the FAA then you're not flying
enough"
Do not archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=153171#153171
________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________
Time: 06:10:37 PM PST US
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Short Changing Ourselves!!
From: "ronlee" <rlee468@comcast.net>
I think resale price has a lot has to do with the fact that they are fabric
covered
airplanes. I now own a CH701 because I can leave it out in the Arizona sun
without fear of deteriorating.
--------
Ron Lee
Tucson, Arizona
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=153178#153178
________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________
Time: 06:33:08 PM PST US
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Short Changing Ourselves!!
From: "dave" <dave@cfisher.com>
> Ronlee wrote....
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I think resale price has a lot has to do with the fact that they are fabric
covered
airplanes. I now own a CH701 because I can leave it out in the Arizona
sun without fear of deteriorating.
>
Well, a 701 will not attract more dollars than Kitfox, they fit in same puzzle
it seems that they lose resale value and sell relatively cheap as we are
discussing
here like the Kitfox. They are slower cruise as well.
701 not a bad plane at all but a Kitfox will outshine it all the way around. 701
will possibly give a higer AOA climb than a Kitfox but the climb rate will
not be any better.
I have a friend with a 701 /912 UL on wheels-- his cruise is the same as my
Kitfox
IV /582 on Amphibs - 85 mph. On floats the 701 really slow down to
about 70 to 75.
--------
Rotax Dealer, Ontario Canada
Flying Videos and Kitfox Info
http://www.cfisher.com/
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=153179#153179
________________________________ Message 25 ____________________________________
Time: 06:37:57 PM PST US
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: For Sale
From: "dave" <dave@cfisher.com>
> KitFox Model 3 With Model 4 Wing (Droop Tips)
> Registered Experimental
> Rotax 912 UL - 400 Hrs. Engine and Airframe
>
> Asking $21,500
A great deal here if anyone knows someone looking for a Kitfox.
What is your Cruise speeds and empty weights ?
--------
Rotax Dealer, Ontario Canada
Flying Videos and Kitfox Info
http://www.cfisher.com/
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=153181#153181
________________________________ Message 26 ____________________________________
Time: 07:04:29 PM PST US
From: Dan Billingsley <dan@azshowersolutions.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Short Changing Ourselves!!
Well, several of the comments I have seen here tell a bit of a story. Many of
you
are looking at your Kitfoxes as being a lesser airplane than say a certified
plane...sounding almost like a disposable lighter. ...Well, I got 2000 lights
out of her and got my money's worth...huh? If these planes are built well they
are better than any spam can you can rent. With that mindset we can forget
it. I thought Kitfoxers knew what they had and have what they know is the best
plane in its class. And I have trouble seeing the resale is low because it is
a fabric plane. Have you priced a Piper Cub lately? I had a Cub driver in my
EAA chapter tell me himself that after he flew with a Kitfox he now holds a high
respect for them. He couldn't quit talking about how great they are. Of course
we all know this...so where is the problem?
Dan B
ronlee <rlee468@comcast.net> wrote:
I think resale price has a lot has to do with the fact that they are fabric
covered
airplanes. I now own a CH701 because I can leave it out in the Arizona sun
without fear of deteriorating.
--------
Ron Lee
Tucson, Arizona
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=153178#153178
________________________________ Message 27 ____________________________________
Time: 07:11:26 PM PST US
From: "Kevin Cozik" <Kcozik@cablespeed.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Short Changing Ourselves!!
I think resale price has a lot has to do with the fact that they are fabric
covered airplanes.........
Hasn't hurt the cubs at all. It is the market that determines what your
kitfox is worth. If you choose to list it above what the market is paying,
most of the time it will be just that, listed. I built mine with no
intention to sell but like Darin, will cross that bridge when the time
comes. On the other side of the coin, I bought my model 4 with a 912 second
hand and flying. When it came time to sell I saw a return of almost 20%
after 2 years of flying.
Kevin Cozik
Series 6-7
914 Turbo
Czech floats
Lansing Michigan
----- Original Message -----
From: "ronlee" <rlee468@comcast.net>
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 9:10 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Short Changing Ourselves!!
>
> I think resale price has a lot has to do with the fact that they are
> fabric covered airplanes. I now own a CH701 because I can leave it out in
> the Arizona sun without fear of deteriorating.
>
> --------
> Ron Lee
> Tucson, Arizona
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=153178#153178
>
>
>
________________________________ Message 28 ____________________________________
Time: 07:28:17 PM PST US
From: jareds <jareds@verizon.net>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Any Winter Flying Tips
Just wondering if any of you had any 582 winter flying tips.
Found a few "targets" out on the ice in the form of shacks / snow banks
/ Ice hockey poles and flags.
On a day below freezing i wondered if a 582 was succeptable to a siezure
or some other issue.
Any other tips for winter flying.
________________________________ Message 29 ____________________________________
Time: 08:14:39 PM PST US
From: "Steve Magdic" <stevemagdic@WI.RR.COM>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: For Sale
5000rpm = 92mph
634lbs Empty
Thanks,
Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: "dave" <dave@cfisher.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 8:37 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: For Sale
>
>
>> KitFox Model 3 With Model 4 Wing (Droop Tips)
>> Registered Experimental
>> Rotax 912 UL - 400 Hrs. Engine and Airframe
>>
>> Asking $21,500
>
>
> A great deal here if anyone knows someone looking for a Kitfox.
>
> What is your Cruise speeds and empty weights ?
>
> --------
> Rotax Dealer, Ontario Canada
> Flying Videos and Kitfox Info
> http://www.cfisher.com/
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=153181#153181
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________ Message 30 ____________________________________
Time: 09:16:21 PM PST US
From: Jim_and_Lucy Chuk <thesupe@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Any Winter Flying Tips
The only concerns I have had flying my Avid B and last winter the Mark IV w
as staying warm. No problems with the engine and cold weather. When you t
hink about it, these engines are basicly detuned snomobile engines (plus so
me other changes) and they were made to run in the winter. I did put synth
etic oil in the gearboxes so the engine would turn over and start easier.
I've always liked the winter flying better than summer. Better lift, smoot
her air and lots of emergency fields with the frozen lakes if you need them
. Around here, there are more trees than fields. On the heat issue, I bou
ght an electric "hot seat" from J C Whitney that plugged into a cigaret lig
hter. I have a power point in the plane and I would plug into that. I wou
ld slip the hot seat into the back of my snomobile suit and usually had to
run it on low or it would be to hot. $20.00 and worth it!! Never had trou
ble landing on lakes, till last week when some slush flew up and wrecked my
prop. I did replace the 582 in my Mk IV last summer with a Jabiru and no
w have a much better heat setup and have not been useing the hotseat. Wint
er is not the time to wish you were flying----- go do it!! Just my 2 cent
s worth. Jim Chuk> Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:27:17 -0600> From: jareds@ver
izon.net> Subject: Kitfox-List: Any Winter Flying Tips> To: kitfox-list@mat
>> > Just wondering if any of you had any 582 winter flying tips.> Found a
few "targets" out on the ice in the form of shacks / snow banks > / Ice hoc
key poles and flags.> On a day below freezing i wondered if a 582 was succe
ptable to a siezure > or some other issue.> Any other tips for winter flyin
====> > >
_________________________________________________________________
i=92m is proud to present Cause Effect, a series about real people making a
difference.
________________________________ Message 31 ____________________________________
Time: 11:51:29 PM PST US
From: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Skiplane flight...off topic
> From: Lynn Matteson [lynnmatt@jps.net]
>...and landing there was a bear
> too. As soon as the tail touched (first), the mains then touched, and
> the tail came up pretty good.
I know what you mean, Lynn. A good thing we have wires that keep the fuselage to
the end of the skis. You really can't tip over the nose but it sure feels scary
when the tail comes up.
Cheers,
Michel Verheughe
Norway
Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200
do not archive
<pre><b><font size=2 color="#000000" face="courier new,courier">
</b></font></pre>
________________________________________________________________________
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: Battery Location |
I think Larry had the right answer. Check the weight and balance...
That is the only correct way.
Marwynne
LarryM wrote:
>
> Hey Pat,
>
> I'm just down the road in Genoa. Check out Ramme (IL0)that's a zero. We have
about 10 airplanes here. The runway is N/S 2400'. Come see us or give me
a call 815-784-3476.
> I would suggest looking at your current weight and balance. If it is not
near the aft limit, then I would leave the battery where it is. The airplanes
tend to be on the nose heavy side. They fly much better with the cg aft of center,
but of course within the envelope.
> Do call,
> larry
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=158180#158180
>
>
>
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 |
|
C. David Estapa
-----Original Message-----
From: "n85ae" <n85ae@yahoo.com>
To:kitfox-list@matronics.com
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: cabin heat
Seal up the tail so the air can't come up from the back. The baggage sack
is pretty porous, and a TON of cold air migrates forward from the leaky
area where the elevator attaches. I use heat off the exhaust, and it'll just
about melt your shoes, but the back of the neck gets pretty frosty.
Jeff
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=158091#158091
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 |
|
That's hard to say, 205AK took almost 10 years but in that time I also
completed 3 degree's, 1 wife, and 1 son (auto pilot). I think the 2 biggest
factors will be how often you work on it and your mechanical back groung. I
have seen a fox built in as little as 6 months
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of jlfernan
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 8:24 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Build time?
Just started lurking here. I'm going to be going to the factory for a tour
and possible order a Super Sport. One question I have is what is the
approx. build time on Kit Foxes?
--------
Jorge Fernandez
N214JL Reserved
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=158181#158181
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: Battery Location |
> My question is, should I move the battery to the back of the firewall, where
I see some other 582 engine battery installations?
Pat, I would leave the battery where it is until the rebuild is complete enough
to do a close weight and balance. Then you can move the battery forward if needed
and you will be able to know how far. It will probably be easier to remove
the existing cables at that time than to reinstall them if you need the CG
to move back.
--------
Tom Jones
Classic IV, Phase one
503 Rotax, 72 inch Two blade Warp
Ellensburg, WA
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=158194#158194
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Battery Location |
getting a good weight and balance is definitely the right answer. I have
seen kitfoxes with the bat on the fire wall or like mine just in front of
the tail wheel. It is all determined by the weight and balance.
If you are near Kansas City Mo. EAA chapter 612 has some scales you can use
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Marwynne
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 8:33 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Battery Location
I think Larry had the right answer. Check the weight and balance...
That is the only correct way.
Marwynne
LarryM wrote:
>
> Hey Pat,
>
> I'm just down the road in Genoa. Check out Ramme (IL0)that's a zero. We
have about 10 airplanes here. The runway is N/S 2400'. Come see us or give
me a call 815-784-3476.
> I would suggest looking at your current weight and balance. If it is
not near the aft limit, then I would leave the battery where it is. The
airplanes tend to be on the nose heavy side. They fly much better with the
cg aft of center, but of course within the envelope.
> Do call,
> larry
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=158180#158180
>
>
>
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 |
|
> what is the approx. build time on Kit Foxes?
I was a first time builder. It took me 1200 hours to build a Classic 4. That
is about twice what the Old Skystar told me it would take.
Some tips to keep the build as short as possible. Build it by the book. Do not
add options that didn't come with the kit. Do not make improvements to the
design.
Do something on building the plane every day and one day there will be nothing
left to do.
--------
Tom Jones
Classic IV, Phase one
503 Rotax, 72 inch Two blade Warp
Ellensburg, WA
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=158198#158198
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 |
|
Bruce,
Type in Cabin heater to the search engine for the KitFox list and you will get
a ton of good ideas. The subject has been discussed many times and thanks to
Matt's great archives, its all there as if it were yesterday!
--------
Don G.
Central Illinois
Kitfox IV Speedster
Luscombe 8A
http://www.geocities.com/dagger369th/my_firefly.htm
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=158202#158202
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: How to increase lift on horizontal stab? |
Same thing I been asking about ,
making a new gear 6 to 10 inches taller.
hopefully it would get me off quicker with greater AOA ?
Tail seem to be restricting me now? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itqyBYxU0lU
--------
Rotax Dealer, Ontario Canada
Flying Videos and Kitfox Info
http://www.cfisher.com/
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=158203#158203
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: Battery Location |
Yup , i would wait till you all done the do the w & B.
my IV model with 582 has the battery behind the seat.
--------
Rotax Dealer, Ontario Canada
Flying Videos and Kitfox Info
http://www.cfisher.com/
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=158205#158205
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 |
|
I took the better part of 3 1/2 years (I have no idea how many hours)
working just part time and mostly on weekends. The time would have been cut
to no more than 3 years if I did not have to wait at least 6 months for an
engine.
Roger McConnell, Duncan, OK
Model 7 Trigear, Rotax 912uls
Flying sense Jan. 06
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of jlfernan
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 8:24 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Build time?
Just started lurking here. I'm going to be going to the factory for a tour
and possible order a Super Sport. One question I have is what is the
approx. build time on Kit Foxes?
--------
Jorge Fernandez
N214JL Reserved
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=158181#158181
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: Kitfox-List Digest: 31 Msgs - 12/19/07 |
I used a heat shrink plastic that boat dealers use to cover boats with
when they ship them. It worked fine.
Floran Higgins
Helena, Mt.
Speedster
912 ULS
----- Original Message -----
From: riquenkelly@aol.com
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 7:30 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Kitfox-List Digest: 31 Msgs -
12/19/07
Listers,
I have a classic 4 and am approaching a move for my work. I have a
long way to go and intend to trailer the airplane. Has anyone tried to
design a cover to protect the inside of the aircraft while riding on a
trailer? The area vacated when the turtledeck is removed is exposed to
the open air when folded. Any experience with this???
Thanks!
Rique
Classic 4
582
-----Original Message-----
From: Kitfox-List Digest Server <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
To: Kitfox-List Digest List <kitfox-list-digest@matronics.com>
Sent: Thu, 20 Dec 2007 2:58 am
Subject: Kitfox-List Digest: 31 Msgs - 12/19/07
*
Online Versions of Today's List Digest Archive
Today's complete Kitfox-List Digest can also be found in either of the
two Web Links listed below. The .html file includes the Digest
formatted
in HTML for viewing with a web browser and features Hyperlinked Indexes
and Message Navigation. The .txt file includes the plain ASCII version
of the Kitfox-List Digest and can be viewed with a generic text editor
such as Notepad or with a web browser.
HTML Version:
http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=html&
Chapter 07-12-19&Archive=Kitfox
Text Version:
http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=txt&C
hapter 07-12-19&Archive=Kitfox
======================
EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive
======================
----------------------------------------------------------
Kitfox-List Digest Archive
---
Total Messages Posted Wed 12/19/07: 31
----------------------------------------------------------
Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:22 AM - Re: resending: Help-582 ignition fault (R & L
Ainsworth)
2. 04:39 AM - Re: new member to the list (RRTRACK@aol.com)
3. 05:24 AM - Short Changing Ourselves!! (RAY Gignac)
4. 06:15 AM - Short Changing Ourselves!! (fox5flyer)
5. 07:05 AM - Re: Short Changing Ourselves!! (Randy Lervold)
6. 07:34 AM - Re: Bush tires: Kitfox3 on Nankang Tires (Charles
Boccaccio)
7. 07:59 AM - Re: Short Changing Ourselves!! (dave)
8. 08:16 AM - Re: Bush tires: Kitfox3 on Nankang Tires (Charles
Boccaccio)
9. 08:33 AM - Bush tires: Kitfox3 on Nankang Tires (fox5flyer)
10. 08:45 AM - Skiplane flight...off topic (Lynn Matteson)
11. 09:06 AM - Re: Test Fit Needed Mid Atlantic Area
(Mdkitfox@aol.com)
12. 09:10 AM - Re: Merry Christmas (Mdkitfox@aol.com)
13. 12:37 PM - Re: Skiplane flight...off topic (Jim_and_Lucy Chuk)
14. 01:08 PM - Re: Short Changing Ourselves!! (darinh)
15. 01:08 PM - Re: Bush tires: Kitfox3 on Nankang Tires (Lowell
Fitt)
16. 01:42 PM - Re: Short Changing Ourselves!! (Dan Billingsley)
17. 01:44 PM - Re: Skiplane flight...off topic (Lynn Matteson)
18. 03:18 PM - Re: Short Changing Ourselves!! (kitfoxmike)
19. 03:22 PM - Re: Short Changing Ourselves!! (kitfoxmike)
20. 03:24 PM - Short Changing Ourselves! (RAY Gignac)
21. 04:15 PM - Re: For Sale (Robert Simon)
22. 05:39 PM - Re: Bush tires: Kitfox3 on Nankang Tires
(kitfoxmike)
23. 06:10 PM - Re: Short Changing Ourselves!! (ronlee)
24. 06:33 PM - Re: Short Changing Ourselves!! (dave)
25. 06:37 PM - Re: For Sale (dave)
26. 07:04 PM - Re: Re: Short Changing Ourselves!! (Dan Billingsley)
27. 07:11 PM - Re: Re: Short Changing Ourselves!! (Kevin Cozik)
28. 07:28 PM - Any Winter Flying Tips (jareds)
29. 08:14 PM - Re: Re: For Sale (Steve Magdic)
30. 09:16 PM - Re: Any Winter Flying Tips (Jim_and_Lucy Chuk)
31. 11:51 PM - Re: Skiplane flight...off topic (Michel Verheughe)
________________________________ Message 1
_____________________________________
Time: 01:22:50 AM PST US
From: "R & L Ainsworth" <rainsworth@xtra.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: resending: Help-582 ignition fault
Thanks to those who replied to my post re ignition. I do not have a tiny
tach but I will look into getting one.
Russell Ainsworth Mod 4 1050 ZK-KIV NEW ZEALAND
Do not archive.
________________________________ Message 2
_____________________________________
Time: 04:39:36 AM PST US
From: RRTRACK@aol.com
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: new member to the list
Yes, register as an Experimental Home Built with 1320# gross or less and
without the IFA prop or anything else that would disqualify your plane
from the
LSA category. Registering the plane as an E-LSA is no longer an option
as the
deadline soon arrives. (unless they change the deadline of Jan 31, 2008)
Mark
Kitfox 5 Vixen
912UL IVO
Hartford, Wisconsin
(http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004)
________________________________ Message 3
_____________________________________
Time: 05:24:08 AM PST US
From: RAY Gignac <kitfoxpilot@msn.com>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Short Changing Ourselves!!
I am not trying to stir up problems on the list, I just wanted to throw
thi
s out as a general question. Why is it that the Kitfox
community/builders/
owners sell these fine aircraft so cheap? to me it is like a
forclosure, y
ou sell a Fox for say $13,000, $18,000 or even $21,000 when in fact it
shou
ld be worth $35,000 to $40,000 maybe even more! this just makes it bad
for
other Kitfox builders/Owers who might try to sell there fine craft, and
ser
iously under values our planes! When you look at the other LSA aircraft
on
the used market say a CH701 which are listed at $40,000 or others
which i
s in the ball park compared to new LSA going for $55,000 and up! is the
Ki
tfox the YUGO of LSA's or is it the BMW which is quality.
Ray
_________________________________________________________________
Get the power of Windows + Web with the new Windows Live.
http://www.windowslive.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_powerofwindows_122007
________________________________ Message 4
_____________________________________
Time: 06:15:02 AM PST US
From: "fox5flyer" <fox5flyer@idealwifi.net>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Short Changing Ourselves!!
Ray, this topic comes and goes. Basically, in my opinion, it's nothing
more than "the market sets the price". In other words, one sells his
airplane for whatever he/she can get. There are many variables
involved, ie., how motivated the seller is, model, engine, panel,
quality of build, damage history, location, overall condition, hangared,
etc. You see a lot of experimental airplanes on Barnstormers, etc
asking 55k+ (for example), but that doesn't mean they're getting that
much in the end. Price it low and it sells quickly. Price it too high
and it won't sell. Sure some folks make a profit on their airplanes,
but the truth be known, I doubt that very many of the builders actually
get back what they have in them. That isn't a Kitfox problem. It's the
experimental market. When I sold my Model II, I got pretty close to
what I had in it and I was satisfied because I flew it for nearly 400
hours and that counts for a lot.
Just my opinion.
Deke
S5 NE Michigan
----- Original Message -----
From: RAY Gignac
To: kitfox-list
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 8:23 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Short Changing Ourselves!!
I am not trying to stir up problems on the list, I just wanted to
throw this out as a general question. Why is it that the Kitfox
community/builders/owners sell these fine aircraft so cheap? to me it
is like a forclosure, you sell a Fox for say $13,000, $18,000 or even
$21,000 when in fact it should be worth $35,000 to $40,000 maybe even
more! this just makes it bad for other Kitfox builders/Owers who might
try to sell there fine craft, and seriously under values our planes!
When you look at the other LSA aircraft on the used market say a CH701
which are listed at $40,000 or others which is in the ball park
compared to new LSA going for $55,000 and up! is the Kitfox the YUGO of
LSA's or is it the BMW which is quality.
Ray
________________________________ Message 5
_____________________________________
Time: 07:05:40 AM PST US
From: "Randy Lervold" <randy@romeolima.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Short Changing Ourselves!!
I'm considering starting a Super Sport and have been wondering the same
thing regarding resale value. Having built two RVs, and being familiar
with that market, I know that you can almost always get more than you
have into a flying aircraft, so long as the equipment and build quality
are at least average. In checking around though it seems that with most
other kit aircraft you are lucky to recoup your hard costs. For the
later 912 equipped Kitfoxes, what is typical resale versus what is
invested?
Randy Lervold
Camas, WA
www.rv-3.com
www.rv-8.com
----- Original Message -----
From: fox5flyer
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 6:13 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Short Changing Ourselves!!
Ray, this topic comes and goes. Basically, in my opinion, it's
nothing more than "the market sets the price". In other words, one
sells his airplane for whatever he/she can get. There are many
variables involved, ie., how motivated the seller is, model, engine,
panel, quality of build, damage history, location, overall condition,
hangared, etc. You see a lot of experimental airplanes on Barnstormers,
etc asking 55k+ (for example), but that doesn't mean they're getting
that much in the end. Price it low and it sells quickly. Price it too
high and it won't sell. Sure some folks make a profit on their
airplanes, but the truth be known, I doubt that very many of the
builders actually get back what they have in them. That isn't a Kitfox
problem. It's the experimental market. When I sold my Model II, I got
pretty close to what I had in it and I was satisfied because I flew it
for nearly 400 hours and that counts for a lot.
Just my opinion.
Deke
S5 NE Michigan
----- Original Message -----
From: RAY Gignac
To: kitfox-list
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 8:23 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Short Changing Ourselves!!
I am not trying to stir up problems on the list, I just wanted to
throw this out as a general question. Why is it that the Kitfox
community/builders/owners sell these fine aircraft so cheap? to me it
is like a forclosure, you sell a Fox for say $13,000, $18,000 or even
$21,000 when in fact it should be worth $35,000 to $40,000 maybe even
more! this just makes it bad for other Kitfox builders/Owers who might
try to sell there fine craft, and seriously under values our planes!
When you look at the other LSA aircraft on the used market say a CH701
which are listed at $40,000 or others which is in the ball park
compared to new LSA going for $55,000 and up! is the Kitfox the YUGO of
LSA's or is it the BMW which is quality.
Ray
________________________________ Message 6
_____________________________________
Time: 07:34:46 AM PST US
From: Charles Boccaccio <charlieboccaccio@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Bush tires: Kitfox3 on Nankang Tires
Hi Greg:
I ordered the tires from Tiresunlimited.com
The tire size is 21 x 12 - 8. The model number is N800 and the part
number is
T30151002, they cost $27.64 each plus shipping. They'll arrive tied
together
and it's a little tricky getting the tires mounted since they are
collapsed and
don't seal against the rim. I tied a tourniquet around the periphery of
the
tire and this forced the inner tire to mont on the rim and hold the 5
PSI the
tires need to roll your Kitfox.
So far I have about 60 landings on the tires and they have been a joy.
Expect
a very mild jolt when you touch down on asphalt, since there is a lot of
tire
that has to get spinning, but landing on grass or gravel is is always a
charm.
On a tail dragger, your prop will have about two extra inches of
clerance. I
cannot say how much cruise speed has been effected by the new tires, but
what
ever it is, it's minor. The tires wiegh the same as the original tires
the kit
came with.
Charlie
GONER752@aol.com wrote:
Charlie,
Could you provide some specifics? Size, price, source?
Thanks,
Greg G.
Macedon, N.Y.
23NK
n375KL
Mod 2
582
do not archive
---------------------------------
---------------------------------
________________________________ Message 7
_____________________________________
Time: 07:59:38 AM PST US
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Short Changing Ourselves!!
From: "dave" <dave@cfisher.com>
Sad but true that you will lose 50% of your cash outlay on a Kitplane in
many
cases.
I said many times that Kitfoxes are CHEAP CHHEAP CHEAP !!!!
look at Challengers selling for over 30k with a 503 and a Kitfox IV
with 912
selling
for 22k . HEll of a deal.
With a used market like this , is makes it harder to build a new one
from
investment
point of view plus you can fly now for less than 1/2 of the price.
Now
a few of us have agreed that the Kitfox Market has likely bottomed out
and maybe
they will appreciate from here.?
--------
Rotax Dealer, Ontario Canada
Flying Videos and Kitfox Info
http://www.cfisher.com/
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=153093#153093
________________________________ Message 8
_____________________________________
Time: 08:16:17 AM PST US
From: Charles Boccaccio <charlieboccaccio@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Bush tires: Kitfox3 on Nankang Tires
Jeff:
Max gross for the Grove landing gear on the Kitfox3 is 1,200 Lbs.
The tires are rated to only 355 lbs at 5 PSI, so I keep my gross
weight to no
more then 710 Lbs.
Charlie
jeff puls <pulsair@mindspring.com> wrote:
Charlie,
What kind of useful load do you have with the tires and Grove gear?
Jeff
Classic
IV
----- Original Message -----
From: Charles Boccaccio
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 3:01 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Bush tires: Kitfox3 on Nankang Tires
A few months ago there was talk on the list about bush tires on
Kitfoxes.
Please find attached a picture of my KF3 with Nankang tires. I've
rolled the
plane up to 45MPH (well above normal operating speed) and they roll just
fine
and landings are a little more forgiving.
Charlie
Kitfox 3
---------------------------------
---------------------------------
________________________________ Message 9
_____________________________________
Time: 08:33:39 AM PST US
From: "fox5flyer" <fox5flyer@idealwifi.net>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Bush tires: Kitfox3 on Nankang Tires
Is that the same tire that was marketed as Kingfox. ??
Deke
S5 NE Michigan
----- Original Message -----
From: Charles Boccaccio
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:26 AM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Bush tires: Kitfox3 on Nankang Tires
Hi Greg:
I ordered the tires from Tiresunlimited.com
The tire size is 21 x 12 - 8. The model number is N800 and the part
number is T30151002, they cost $27.64 each plus shipping. They'll arrive
tied together and it's a little tricky getting the tires mounted since
they are collapsed and don't seal against the rim. I tied a tourniquet
around the periphery of the tire and this forced the inner tire to mont
on the rim and hold the 5 PSI the tires need to roll your Kitfox.
So far I have about 60 landings on the tires and they have been a joy.
Expect a very mild jolt when you touch down on asphalt, since there is a
lot of tire that has to get spinning, but landing on grass or gravel is
is always a charm. On a tail dragger, your prop will have about two
extra inches of clerance. I cannot say how much cruise speed has been
effected by the new tires, but what ever it is, it's minor. The tires
wiegh the same as the original tires the kit came with.
Charlie
GONER752@aol.com wrote:
Charlie,
Could you provide some specifics? Size, price, source?
Thanks,
Greg G.
Macedon, N.Y.
23NK
n375KL
Mod 2
582
do not archive
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
________________________________ Message 10
____________________________________
Time: 08:45:01 AM PST US
From: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Skiplane flight...off topic
Just made my first skiplane (Kitfox IV/Jabiru 2200 w/skis) flight of
the season. Eight to ten inches of snow on the field, but my hangar
neighbor had cleared out the area in front of mine, so I got it out
and turned and hangar doors closed before startup. (I learned my
lesson from last year's mistake of leaving them open and finding snow
all over everything upon return.) A couple of 2 foot drifts were
handled nicely...up and over...and the taxi to the far end of the
1700-foot field was with about 1500-2200 rpm to keep it moving. Made
the mag check while taxiing, turned just fine and started the run. It
was slow going at first, then the skis climbed up a bit on top of
snow, speed picked up and off I went. Flew to a field nearby(3NP),
landed, taxied a bit, shut down, had coffee, fired up and left
without incident. There were drifts at Napoleon (3NP) too, but the
'fox handled 'em with ease, and I got off there too, but carrying a
bunch of snow up with me, on the skis....most blew off later. Landed
at home field by holding off on touchdown until close to hangar area,
then dropped her in...didn't want to have to taxi too far. Would have
flown more but ceiling was low, and didn't want to chance flying to
JXN for fuel and run into less-than-VFR.
Lynn Matteson
Grass Lake, Michigan
Kitfox IV Speedster w/Jabiru 2200
flying w/440+ hrs
do not archive
________________________________ Message 11
____________________________________
Time: 09:06:02 AM PST US
From: Mdkitfox@aol.com
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Test Fit Needed Mid Atlantic Area
I'm about 6 feet and the same weight. I have flown the IV and while it
is
snug, especially with another person on board. It would not be very c
omfortable for a long trip. The Series V (and up) is a much better fit
for a
big
guy. I don't know anyone near Dover to give you a test flight, but Ray
G., if
you're reading this you might know someone who can help this person
out.
Rick Weiss
Series V Speedster - N39RW, 912S Power
DO NOT ARCHIVE
In a message dated 12/18/2007 11:58:19 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
rklarich@msn.com writes:
Hello,
I'm 6'1 and 230# and found out I should get a test fit in a KF 3 or 4
before
diving into a purchase- anyone that can help? 19934 zip code, near
Dover,
DE.
Thanks!
(http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004)
________________________________ Message 12
____________________________________
Time: 09:10:41 AM PST US
From: Mdkitfox@aol.com
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Merry Christmas
The ladies and gentlemen on this list are the finest folks on the
planet and
it's our wish that you have a very Merry Christmas and happy, healthy
new
year. Fly safe in 08. :-)
Rick Weiss
Series V Speedster - N39RW, 912S Power
DO NOT ARCHIVE
(http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004)
________________________________ Message 13
____________________________________
Time: 12:37:22 PM PST US
From: Jim_and_Lucy Chuk <thesupe@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Skiplane flight...off topic
Hi Lynn, I love the skis also, Just be careful of slush if you land on
th
e frozen lakes. My new prop should be here today. Do you pull a drag up
an
d down the field to pack the snow? I've been doing that for about 5
years
on my strip and I think I have finally come up with a drag that really
work
s. If you want, I could describe it and post a picture. Jim Chuk Avid
MK
IV Mn> From: lynnmatt@jps.net> Subject: Kitfox-List: Skiplane
flight...o
ff topic> Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 11:44:29 -0500> To:
kitfox-list@matronics.
> Just made my first skiplane (Kitfox IV/Jabiru 2200 w/skis) flight of
> t
he season. Eight to ten inches of snow on the field, but my hangar >
neighb
or had cleared out the area in front of mine, so I got it out > and
turned
and hangar doors closed before startup. (I learned my > lesson from last
ye
ar's mistake of leaving them open and finding snow > all over everything
up
on return.) A couple of 2 foot drifts were > handled nicely...up and
over..
.and the taxi to the far end of the > 1700-foot field was with about
1500-2
200 rpm to keep it moving. Made > the mag check while taxiing, turned
just
fine and started the run. It > was slow going at first, then the skis
climb
ed up a bit on top of > snow, speed picked up and off I went. Flew to a
fie
ld nearby(3NP), > landed, taxied a bit, shut down, had coffee, fired up
and
left > without incident. There were drifts at Napoleon (3NP) too, but
the
> 'fox handled 'em with ease, and I got off there too, but carrying a >
bun
ch of snow up with me, on the skis....most blew off later. Landed > at
home
field by holding off on touchdown until close to hangar area, > then
dropp
ed her in...didn't want to have to taxi too far. Would have > flown more
bu
t ceiling was low, and didn't want to chance flying to > JXN for fuel
and r
un into less-than-VFR.> > Lynn Matteson> Grass Lake, Michigan> Kitfox IV
Sp
========================>
_
======================> > >
_________________________________________________________________
The best games are on Xbox 360. Click here for a special offer on an
Xbox
360 Console.
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/wheretobuy/
________________________________ Message 14
____________________________________
Time: 01:08:08 PM PST US
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Short Changing Ourselves!!
From: "darinh" <gerns25@netscape.net>
The market on the RVs is a completely different animal altogether than
most
other
experimental markets...you can actually recoup if not make money on a
flying
RV. The way I see it with the kitfox is that if you decide to build
one, it
is not based on the resale value, it is based on the flying qualities
and the
fun factor...it is hard to beat a Kitfox for the type of flying it was
designed
for. Having said that, resale is always a consideration but I figure if
I
have to sell it down the road, I will get what I get and chock the loss
up to
a ton of fun flying hours in the plane. I know I will never get even
close to
what I have in my plane back out of it but I don't plan on selling...if
life
makes me, well then I guess I will deal with that then. By the way, has
anyone
checked the prices of new Rotax engines? A 912s is over $18k! Prices
like
these should increase the value of our Kitfoxes to some extent.
--------
Darin Hawkes
Series 7 (under Construction)
914 Turbo
Ogden, Utah
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=153131#153131
________________________________ Message 15
____________________________________
Time: 01:08:54 PM PST US
From: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Bush tires: Kitfox3 on Nankang Tires
Charlie,
I think you might be underestimating the Nankang tires. I flew with
them on
my Model IV for about three years and never hesitated to fly at 1200
lbs.
This flying included lots of off pavement landings. I suspect the tires
are
rated as they are because they are designed for the ATV market where
rough
terrain at fairly high speeds is common. After my chrash landing, which
tore the aluminum spring gear off the airplane, one of the Nankang tires
was
still inflated and the other was flat. I didn't have time to carefully
examine the flattened tire to determine why it lost air.
I am not suggesting abusing any of the equipment we use, but in this
case, I
think in the normal use of these tires on our airplanes, they are fine
up to
the rated weight of the airframe in the earlier models.
Yes, these were the tires sold as Kingfox.
Lowell
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles Boccaccio" <charlieboccaccio@yahoo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 8:14 AM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Bush tires: Kitfox3 on Nankang Tires
> Jeff:
>
> Max gross for the Grove landing gear on the Kitfox3 is 1,200 Lbs.
>
> The tires are rated to only 355 lbs at 5 PSI, so I keep my gross
weight
> to no more then 710 Lbs.
>
> Charlie
>
> jeff puls <pulsair@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Charlie,
> What kind of useful load do you have with the tires and Grove gear?
Jeff
> Classic IV
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Charles Boccaccio
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 3:01 PM
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Bush tires: Kitfox3 on Nankang Tires
>
>
> A few months ago there was talk on the list about bush tires on
Kitfoxes.
>
> Please find attached a picture of my KF3 with Nankang tires. I've
rolled
> the plane up to 45MPH (well above normal operating speed) and they
roll
> just fine and landings are a little more forgiving.
>
> Charlie
> Kitfox 3
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Search.
________________________________ Message 16
____________________________________
Time: 01:42:15 PM PST US
From: Dan Billingsley <dan@azshowersolutions.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Short Changing Ourselves!!
Randy,
You bring up a good point as well as a question. Why is it with an RV
you can
re-coup your investment and with a Kitfox, as it stands now...you will
loose?
I can answer that question...because the Kitfox community has allowed
it. I
am currently building a very modified IV and I know I will be very happy
with
it when it's finished. I will have close to $50,000 in it when all is
said and
done and it dose grind on me that the market has the mindset it does.
When I was up at the factory fly-in this last year I had this
discussion with
John McBean and he made a statement that I hope takes hold. Correct me
if I get
this wrong John...but he said once the aviation comunity starts looking
at
the newer Kitfoxes for what they are...then that old mindset should go
away.
These newer planes ARE a high performance ride when you place a 912s
out front
then add in-flight adjustable props, electric trim, glass panels,
etc...These
make for one nice plane and are not comparable to the older generation
Kitfoxes.
Now I don't want to get into a pissing match with someone that has an
older
plane...I will be the first to say that I have seen workmanship on older
planes
that should bring in big bucks in re-sale...alot has to do with the
workmanship.
My point is simply this...these planes need to be purchased and looked
at on an individual basis. If you have never flown in one of the new
foxes, you
need to try one on before you scoff. Until the sellers start to hold
their
own in a buyers market, we may never see the change we all would like to
see.
It will be up to the Kitfox community to take this stand. Looks like I
found my
soapbox.
Dan Billingsley
Mesa, AZ
http://www.azshowersolutions.com/Kitfox1.html
Randy Lervold <randy@romeolima.com> wrote:
.hmmessage P { PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px;
PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px;
MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px } BODY.hmmessage { FONT-SIZE: 10pt;
FONT-FAMILY:
Tahoma } I'm considering starting a Super Sport and have been
wondering
the same thing regarding resale value. Having built two RVs, and being
familiar with that market, I know that you can almost always get more
than you
have into a flying aircraft, so long as the equipment and build quality
are
at least average. In checking around though it seems that with most
other kit
aircraft you are lucky to recoup your hard costs. For the later 912
equipped
Kitfoxes, what is typical resale versus what is invested?
Randy Lervold
Camas, WA
www.rv-3.com
www.rv-8.com
----- Original Message -----
From: fox5flyer
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 6:13 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Short Changing Ourselves!!
Ray, this topic comes and goes. Basically, in my opinion, it's
nothing more
than "the market sets the price". In other words, one sells his
airplane for
whatever he/she can get. There are many variables involved, ie., how
motivated
the seller is, model, engine, panel, quality of build, damage history,
location,
overall condition, hangared, etc. You see a lot of experimental
airplanes
on Barnstormers, etc asking 55k+ (for example), but that doesn't mean
they're
getting that much in the end. Price it low and it sells quickly. Price
it
too high and it won't sell. Sure some folks make a profit on their
airplanes,
but the truth be known, I doubt that very many of the builders actually
get back
what they have in them. That isn't a Kitfox problem. It's the
experimental
market. When I sold my Model II, I got pretty close to what I had in it
and
I was satisfied because I flew it for nearly 400 hours and that counts
for a
lot.
Just my opinion.
Deke
S5 NE Michigan
----- Original Message -----
From: RAY Gignac
To: kitfox-list
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 8:23 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Short Changing Ourselves!!
I am not trying to stir up problems on the list, I just wanted to throw
this out
as a general question. Why is it that the Kitfox
community/builders/owners
sell these fine aircraft so cheap? to me it is like a forclosure, you
sell a
Fox for say $13,000, $18,000 or even $21,000 when in fact it should be
worth
$35,000
to $40,000 maybe even more! this just makes it bad for other Kitfox
builders/Owers
who might try to sell there fine craft, and seriously under values
our planes! When you look at the other LSA aircraft on the used market
say a
CH701 which are listed at $40,000 or others which is in the ball park
compared
to new LSA going for $55,000 and up! is the Kitfox the YUGO of LSA's or
is
it the BMW which is quality.
Ray
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matron
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
________________________________ Message 17
____________________________________
Time: 01:44:08 PM PST US
From: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Skiplane flight...off topic
I'm still waiting for the lakes to become safe enough. Today's
flights...I went up again for a fuel run...were interesting. After a
load of fuel (26 gals. total) was in, no problem with TO at paved
field, but getting off from subsequent (non-packed) grass field was
WAY longer than this mornings' flight...and landing there was a bear
too. As soon as the tail touched (first), the mains then touched, and
the tail came up pretty good. That stuff is really deep and wet.
Ambient was about 35 F at the time, and had been for a few hours. So
the snow became sluggish and hard to push through. As I said, taking
off took about half of the 2400-some foot runway...I just had to wait
until it bounced enough to stay up out of the snow for a little bit,
and it was flying. Landing at home field was again a breeze (wind of
11 mph, gusts of 19, 60 degrees off right side) and I could carry the
plane just off the runway until I wanted to let it down.
Yes, I'd like to see your drag, Jim. Might get others interested, too.
Lynn Matteson
Grass Lake, Michigan
Kitfox IV Speedster w/Jabiru 2200
flying w/440+ hrs
do not archive
On Dec 19, 2007, at 3:32 PM, Jim_and_Lucy Chuk wrote:
> Hi Lynn, I love the skis also, Just be careful of slush if you
> land on the frozen lakes. My new prop should be here today. Do you
> pull a drag up and down the field to pack the snow? I've been
> doing that for about 5 years on my strip and I think I have finally
> come up with a drag that really works. If you want, I could
> describe it and post a picture. Jim Chuk Avid MK IV Mn
>
> > From: lynnmatt@jps.net
> > Subject: Kitfox-List: Skiplane flight...off topic
> > Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 11:44:29 -0500
> > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> >
> >
> > Just made my first skiplane (Kitfox IV/Jabiru 2200 w/skis) flight of
> > the season. Eight to ten inches of snow on the field, but my hangar
> > neighbor had cleared out the area in front of mine, so I got it out
> > and turned and hangar doors closed before startup. (I learned my
> > lesson from last year's mistake of leaving them open and finding
> snow
> > all over everything upon return.) A couple of 2 foot drifts were
> > handled nicely...up and over...and the taxi to the far end of the
> > 1700-foot field was with about 1500-2200 rpm to keep it moving. Made
> > the mag check while taxiing, turned just fine and started the
> run. It
> > was slow going at first, then the skis climbed up a bit on top of
> > snow, speed picked up and off I went. Flew to a field nearby(3NP),
> > landed, taxied a bit, shut down, had coffee, fired up and left
> > without incident. There were drifts at Napoleon (3NP) too, but the
> > 'fox handled 'em with ease, and I got off there too, but carrying a
> > bunch of snow up with me, on the skis....most blew off later. Landed
> > at home field by holding off on touchdown until close to hangar
> area,
> > then dropped her in...didn't want to have to taxi too far. Would
> have
> > flown more but ceiling was low, and didn't want to chance flying to
> > JXN for fuel and run into less-than-VFR.
> >
> > Lynn Matteson
> > Grass Lake, Michigan
> > Kitfox IV Speedster w/Jabiru 2200
> > flying w/440+ hrs
> > do not archive
> >
> >
> >
> &===================
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> The best games are on Xbox 360. Click here for a special offer on
>
>
>
========
________________________________ Message 18
____________________________________
Time: 03:18:43 PM PST US
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Short Changing Ourselves!!
From: "kitfoxmike" <customtrans@qwest.net>
Hummmm.... those old kitfoxes. Well mine is an old one. It's light,
white, and
quite. My perfect airplane for pure fun. Sure I don't want to take it
on a
loooong ride. But the short ones, it can't be beat. I to think about
the
resale.
with the tt being over 1000 now. I look it this way. I flew 400
flights
so far this year, still flying. 300 hours, still counting. If I were
to rent
a cessna at 110 an hour. that comes to 33000 dollars. OUCH!! My cost
for
the fuel was somewhere around 3500 dollars. I had the cheapest fun
imaginable.
Will I ever sell, I'm thinking no. I'm building a rv7, that's for the
long
cross country flights, so I guess I'll be looking for a hanger for the 7
and
keep the kitfox in it's current hanger. Money, not a factor, I have
plenty.
so I mainly am looking for what makes ME happy and the kitfox does just
that,
the rv will also.
--------
kitfoxmike
model IV, 1200
speedster
912ul
building
RV7a
slowbuild wings, fuse, finish kit
"if you're not getting razzed from pilots or the FAA then you're
not flying
enough"
Do not archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=153149#153149
________________________________ Message 19
____________________________________
Time: 03:22:11 PM PST US
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Short Changing Ourselves!!
From: "kitfoxmike" <customtrans@qwest.net>
One thing I forgot. It's not what you have in the airplane that counts.
gadgets.
It's how light it is, how white it is and how quite is important as
well,
that's for those pilots that seem to want to turn in everybody under the
sun.
But light should be the priority because the airplane will fly different
with
all the junk on board. My Rv will be minimal vfr with a 496 hand held
and of
course a radio, I have leather seats with heat, had to keep the wife
happy,
other than that, very basic.
--------
kitfoxmike
model IV, 1200
speedster
912ul
building
RV7a
slowbuild wings, fuse, finish kit
"if you're not getting razzed from pilots or the FAA then you're
not flying
enough"
Do not archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=153152#153152
________________________________ Message 20
____________________________________
Time: 03:24:01 PM PST US
From: RAY Gignac <kitfoxpilot@msn.com>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Short Changing Ourselves!
I did not mean to open a can of worms, or to revisit the past, or to
pour s
alt in an old wound! but I like the responses so far. Look, I'm not
tryin
g to compare a Kitfox to an RV, or trying to recoup builders value. I
know
folks will sell there fine machines far less than what they may be
worth a
fter all we have no KELLY'S BLUE BOOK VALUE and dollars talk! with the
gro
wing LSA market and all the new aircraft I just see our Kitfox planes
worth
much more than what they are being offered at. This is by far a fun
plane
to fly.
Ray Gignac N2BH
Model IV, 1200
912S
_________________________________________________________________
Don't get caught with egg on your face. Play Chicktionary!
http://club.live.com/chicktionary.aspx?icid=chick_wlhmtextlink1_dec
________________________________ Message 21
____________________________________
Time: 04:15:42 PM PST US
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: For Sale
From: Robert Simon <bigbob196@juno.com>
Steve,
You make no mention of a cabin heater? I would like to see pictures?
Over,and out Vieux Bob
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 16:31:57 -0600 "Steve Magdic"
<stevemagdic@wi.rr.com>
writes:
Due to financial concerns I have to put my KitFox up for sale. It's a
model 3 with the Model 4 wing. I thought I'd offer it to the Matronics
KitFox group before I post
it on Barnstormers or some other web based selling platform. I figure it
will be in good hands if someone here decided to purchase it. I'll post
some pics soon.
Here's the description:
FOR SALE
KitFox Model 3 With Model 4 Wing (Droop Tips)
Registered Experimental
Rotax 912 UL - 400 Hrs. Engine and Airframe
3 Blade Warp Prop (Overhauled in 07)
20 Gallon Fuel
New 3 Leaf Tail Spring with Soft Rubber Tail Wheel
Cargo Pod
Snow Skis with all Hardware and ReTrax (Ski Mounted) Retractable Roller
Wheels For Moving Aircraft Across Hard Surface/Hanger
Left Side Toe Brakes Only
New Glass - 06/07
All Service Bulletins Complied With
Condition Inspection 11/07
Complete Builders Logs, Construction Manuals with Photos Included
Engine and Airframe Log Books Up To Date and Included
Standard VFR Panel
Needs Nothing - Buy It And Fly It
Asking $21,500
Contact: Steve Magdic
stevemagdic@wi.rr.com (preferred)
Home: 262-820-9938
Cell: 262-370-3182
________________________________ Message 22
____________________________________
Time: 05:39:09 PM PST US
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Bush tires: Kitfox3 on Nankang Tires
From: "kitfoxmike" <customtrans@qwest.net>
They look just like the kingfox tires I put on this year. I load them
right up
to 1200 gross on the plane. I took mine to the motorcycle guys and let
them
install along with balancing them. I run them up to 60mph at times for
some
exciting
wheel landings and wheelies(run on one wheel). No problems with shake.
I've put about 5000 touch and goes on these things this year alone, they
still
look great. I wanted to try them out in the snow on the grass runway,
but
the airport closed it and wouldn't let me land on it. They sure know
how to
make a grown man cry sometimes don't they. I had to settle for a runway
that
was with packed snow and ice, did a bunch of wheel landings with stop
and goes.
That was fun.
--------
kitfoxmike
model IV, 1200
speedster
912ul
building
RV7a
slowbuild wings, fuse, finish kit
"if you're not getting razzed from pilots or the FAA then you're
not flying
enough"
Do not archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=153171#153171
________________________________ Message 23
____________________________________
Time: 06:10:37 PM PST US
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Short Changing Ourselves!!
From: "ronlee" <rlee468@comcast.net>
I think resale price has a lot has to do with the fact that they are
fabric
covered
airplanes. I now own a CH701 because I can leave it out in the Arizona
sun
without fear of deteriorating.
--------
Ron Lee
Tucson, Arizona
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=153178#153178
________________________________ Message 24
____________________________________
Time: 06:33:08 PM PST US
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Short Changing Ourselves!!
From: "dave" <dave@cfisher.com>
> Ronlee wrote....
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
>
> I think resale price has a lot has to do with the fact that they are
fabric
covered
airplanes. I now own a CH701 because I can leave it out in the Arizona
sun without fear of deteriorating.
>
Well, a 701 will not attract more dollars than Kitfox, they fit in same
puzzle
it seems that they lose resale value and sell relatively cheap as we are
discussing
here like the Kitfox. They are slower cruise as well.
701 not a bad plane at all but a Kitfox will outshine it all the way
around. 701
will possibly give a higer AOA climb than a Kitfox but the climb rate
will
not be any better.
I have a friend with a 701 /912 UL on wheels-- his cruise is the same
as my
Kitfox
IV /582 on Amphibs - 85 mph. On floats the 701 really slow down to
about 70 to 75.
--------
Rotax Dealer, Ontario Canada
Flying Videos and Kitfox Info
http://www.cfisher.com/
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=153179#153179
________________________________ Message 25
____________________________________
Time: 06:37:57 PM PST US
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: For Sale
From: "dave" <dave@cfisher.com>
> KitFox Model 3 With Model 4 Wing (Droop Tips)
> Registered Experimental
> Rotax 912 UL - 400 Hrs. Engine and Airframe
>
> Asking $21,500
A great deal here if anyone knows someone looking for a Kitfox.
What is your Cruise speeds and empty weights ?
--------
Rotax Dealer, Ontario Canada
Flying Videos and Kitfox Info
http://www.cfisher.com/
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=153181#153181
________________________________ Message 26
____________________________________
Time: 07:04:29 PM PST US
From: Dan Billingsley <dan@azshowersolutions.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Short Changing Ourselves!!
Well, several of the comments I have seen here tell a bit of a story.
Many of
you
are looking at your Kitfoxes as being a lesser airplane than say a
certified
plane...sounding almost like a disposable lighter. ...Well, I got 2000
lights
out of her and got my money's worth...huh? If these planes are built
well they
are better than any spam can you can rent. With that mindset we can
forget
it. I thought Kitfoxers knew what they had and have what they know is
the best
plane in its class. And I have trouble seeing the resale is low because
it is
a fabric plane. Have you priced a Piper Cub lately? I had a Cub driver
in my
EAA chapter tell me himself that after he flew with a Kitfox he now
holds a high
respect for them. He couldn't quit talking about how great they are. Of
course
we all know this...so where is the problem?
Dan B
ronlee <rlee468@comcast.net> wrote:
I think resale price has a lot has to do with the fact that they are
fabric
covered
airplanes. I now own a CH701 because I can leave it out in the Arizona
sun
without fear of deteriorating.
--------
Ron Lee
Tucson, Arizona
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=153178#153178
________________________________ Message 27
____________________________________
Time: 07:11:26 PM PST US
From: "Kevin Cozik" <Kcozik@cablespeed.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Short Changing Ourselves!!
I think resale price has a lot has to do with the fact that they are
fabric
covered airplanes.........
Hasn't hurt the cubs at all. It is the market that determines what your
kitfox is worth. If you choose to list it above what the market is
paying,
most of the time it will be just that, listed. I built mine with no
intention to sell but like Darin, will cross that bridge when the time
comes. On the other side of the coin, I bought my model 4 with a 912
second
hand and flying. When it came time to sell I saw a return of almost 20%
after 2 years of flying.
Kevin Cozik
Series 6-7
914 Turbo
Czech floats
Lansing Michigan
----- Original Message -----
From: "ronlee" <rlee468@comcast.net>
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 9:10 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Short Changing Ourselves!!
>
> I think resale price has a lot has to do with the fact that they are
> fabric covered airplanes. I now own a CH701 because I can leave it out
in
> the Arizona sun without fear of deteriorating.
>
> --------
> Ron Lee
> Tucson, Arizona
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=153178#153178
>
>
>
________________________________ Message 28
____________________________________
Time: 07:28:17 PM PST US
From: jareds <jareds@verizon.net>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Any Winter Flying Tips
Just wondering if any of you had any 582 winter flying tips.
Found a few "targets" out on the ice in the form of shacks / snow banks
/ Ice hockey poles and flags.
On a day below freezing i wondered if a 582 was succeptable to a siezure
or some other issue.
Any other tips for winter flying.
________________________________ Message 29
____________________________________
Time: 08:14:39 PM PST US
From: "Steve Magdic" <stevemagdic@WI.RR.COM>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: For Sale
5000rpm = 92mph
634lbs Empty
Thanks,
Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: "dave" <dave@cfisher.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 8:37 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: For Sale
>
>
>> KitFox Model 3 With Model 4 Wing (Droop Tips)
>> Registered Experimental
>> Rotax 912 UL - 400 Hrs. Engine and Airframe
>>
>> Asking $21,500
>
>
> A great deal here if anyone knows someone looking for a Kitfox.
>
> What is your Cruise speeds and empty weights ?
>
> --------
> Rotax Dealer, Ontario Canada
> Flying Videos and Kitfox Info
> http://www.cfisher.com/
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=153181#153181
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________ Message 30
____________________________________
Time: 09:16:21 PM PST US
From: Jim_and_Lucy Chuk <thesupe@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Any Winter Flying Tips
The only concerns I have had flying my Avid B and last winter the Mark
IV w
as staying warm. No problems with the engine and cold weather. When
you t
hink about it, these engines are basicly detuned snomobile engines (plus
so
me other changes) and they were made to run in the winter. I did put
synth
etic oil in the gearboxes so the engine would turn over and start
easier.
I've always liked the winter flying better than summer. Better lift,
smoot
her air and lots of emergency fields with the frozen lakes if you need
them
. Around here, there are more trees than fields. On the heat issue, I
bou
ght an electric "hot seat" from J C Whitney that plugged into a cigaret
lig
hter. I have a power point in the plane and I would plug into that. I
wou
ld slip the hot seat into the back of my snomobile suit and usually had
to
run it on low or it would be to hot. $20.00 and worth it!! Never had
trou
ble landing on lakes, till last week when some slush flew up and wrecked
my
prop. I did replace the 582 in my Mk IV last summer with a Jabiru and
no
w have a much better heat setup and have not been useing the hotseat.
Wint
er is not the time to wish you were flying----- go do it!! Just my 2
cent
s worth. Jim Chuk> Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:27:17 -0600> From:
jareds@ver
izon.net> Subject: Kitfox-List: Any Winter Flying Tips> To:
kitfox-list@mat
>> > Just wondering if any of you had any 582 winter flying tips.> Found
a
few "targets" out on the ice in the form of shacks / snow banks > / Ice
hoc
key poles and flags.> On a day below freezing i wondered if a 582 was
succe
ptable to a siezure > or some other issue.> Any other tips for winter
flyin
====> > >
_________________________________________________________________
i=92m is proud to present Cause Effect, a series about real people
making a
difference.
________________________________ Message 31
____________________________________
Time: 11:51:29 PM PST US
From: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Skiplane flight...off topic
> From: Lynn Matteson [lynnmatt@jps.net]
>...and landing there was a bear
> too. As soon as the tail touched (first), the mains then touched, and
> the tail came up pretty good.
I know what you mean, Lynn. A good thing we have wires that keep the
fuselage to
the end of the skis. You really can't tip over the nose but it sure
feels scary
when the tail comes up.
Cheers,
Michel Verheughe
Norway
Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200
do not archive
<pre><b><font size=2 color="#000000" face="courier new,courier">
</b></font></pre>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Message 39
| 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: | Simply the best engines to use |
Who does??? (Sell them) I looked and couldn't find any one. Also finding a
used BMW here is like looking for hen's teeth.
Noel
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of JC Propeller
Design
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 6:19 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Simply the best engines to use
Or you can have a BMW 1100 S 98 HP at just 3000USD complete with PSRU and
electronic fuel injection.
Jan
Ps, and I don't even sell them.
----- Original Message -----
From: jason Parker <mailto:litesellme@yahoo.com>
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 8:40 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Simply the best engines to use
www.experimentalfuelinjection offers fuel injected engines 914's starting at
15000USD and kit for fuel injection starting at 4500. We offer Fuel
injection done right. Standard equipment is a wideband 02 sensor and a 55
amp alternator.
Jason Parker
661 428-1850
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matronhref
"http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
__________ NOD32 2789 (20080114) Information __________
Message 40
| 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: | Battery Location |
With something as major as an engine replacement I would install the new
engine and reweigh the plane then make appropriate changes as necessary.
Noel
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Pat Reilly
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 9:03 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Battery Location
Kitfoxers, I am rebuilding a Model 3 that had a 912 engine and 2 @13 gallon
wing tanks. At least I think they are 13 gals as that is the only wing tank
option I am familiar with. The fuel header tank is about 18 inches behind
the seat back.The battery was installed about 2 feet behind the seat back on
the fusalage. I am installing a 582 Rotax. My question is, should I move the
battery to the back of the firewall, where I see some other 582 engine
battery installations?
Pat Reilly
Rockford, Illinois
Message 41
| 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: Simply the best engines to use |
Noel
A company in Quebec sells them complete. At least it says so on
their website
www.airtrikes.net/main.html
Tim Vader
Classic IV
Was EA81, Soon to be
2276 cc GPASC VW
----- Original Message -----
From: Noel Loveys
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 8:32 PM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Simply the best engines to use
Who does??? (Sell them) I looked and couldn't find any one. Also
finding a used BMW here is like looking for hen's teeth.
Noel
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of JC
Propeller Design
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 6:19 PM
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Simply the best engines to use
Or you can have a BMW 1100 S 98 HP at just 3000USD complete with PSRU
and electronic fuel injection.
Jan
Ps, and I don't even sell them.
----- Original Message -----
From: jason Parker
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 8:40 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Simply the best engines to use
www.experimentalfuelinjection offers fuel injected engines 914's
starting at 15000USD and kit for fuel injection starting at 4500. We
offer Fuel injection done right. Standard equipment is a wideband 02
sensor and a 55 amp alternator.
Jason Parker
661 428-1850
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matron
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.comhref="h
ttp://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
__________ NOD32 2789 (20080114) Information __________
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-Listhttp://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
1/13/2008 8:23 PM
Message 42
| 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: Protecting a plane while transporting... |
Another idea would be to use the wrap that's used on shipping pallets.
It's like saran wrap, but quite a bit thicker. Sticks to itself really
well, but not too much else.
You can get it in 14-16" widths I believe and you'd just wrap the plane
up like a monster loaf of bread or the like. No need to heat shrink.
Ron
Tempe, AZ
Dreaming of Flying at the moment!
floran higgins wrote:
> I used a heat shrink plastic that boat dealers use to cover boats with
> when they ship them. It worked fine.
>
> Floran Higgins
> Helena, Mt.
> Speedster
> 912 ULS
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* riquenkelly@aol.com <mailto:riquenkelly@aol.com>
> *To:* kitfox-list@matronics.com <mailto:kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> *Sent:* Monday, January 14, 2008 7:30 PM
> *Subject:* Kitfox-List: Re: Kitfox-List Digest: 31 Msgs - 12/19/07
>
> Listers,
> I have a classic 4 and am approaching a move for my work. I
> have a long way to go and intend to trailer the airplane. Has
> anyone tried to design a cover to protect the inside of the
> aircraft while riding on a trailer? The area vacated when the
> turtledeck is removed is exposed to the open air when folded. Any
> experience with this???
>
> Thanks!
>
> Rique
> Classic 4
>
> *
> *
Message 43
| 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: | Simply the best engines to use |
I contacted Vasssili at that site.... He isn't interested in anything but
trikes. Too bad, I think he could have a lot to offer. I believe his first
engine (BMW) only ran since November. I'm not sure it's flown yet.
Noel
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Vader
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 12:40 AM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Simply the best engines to use
Noel
A company in Quebec sells them complete. At least it says so on their
website
www.airtrikes.net/main.html
Tim Vader
Classic IV
Was EA81, Soon to be
2276 cc GPASC VW
----- Original Message -----
From: Noel Loveys <mailto:noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 8:32 PM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Simply the best engines to use
Who does??? (Sell them) I looked and couldn't find any one. Also finding a
used BMW here is like looking for hen's teeth.
Noel
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of JC Propeller
Design
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 6:19 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Simply the best engines to use
Or you can have a BMW 1100 S 98 HP at just 3000USD complete with PSRU and
electronic fuel injection.
Jan
Ps, and I don't even sell them.
----- Original Message -----
From: jason Parker <mailto:litesellme@yahoo.com>
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 8:40 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Simply the best engines to use
www.experimentalfuelinjection offers fuel injected engines 914's starting at
15000USD and kit for fuel injection starting at 4500. We offer Fuel
injection done right. Standard equipment is a wideband 02 sensor and a 55
amp alternator.
Jason Parker
661 428-1850
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matronhref
"http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
__________ NOD32 2789 (20080114) Information __________
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matronhref
"http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
_____
Release Date: 1/13/2008 8:23 PM
Message 44
| 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 |
|
At 06:24 PM 1/14/2008, you wrote:
>One question I have is what is the approx. build time on Kit Foxes?
Huh. That's easy. It's twice as long as whatever you think it is.
Guy Buchanan
San Diego, CA
K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar.
Do not archive
Message 45
| 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: Battery Location |
At 04:33 PM 1/14/2008, you wrote:
>My question is, should I move the battery to the back of the
>firewall, where I see some other 582 engine battery installations?
You already know the right way. But I'll add that my 582/IV
has the battery just behind the firewall and its CG is "too far" aft,
which means I can't run 40 pounds in my baggage compartment at full
gross without going aft of the rear CG limit.
Guy Buchanan
San Diego, CA
K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar.
Message 46
| 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: Simply the best engines to use |
There is a big world outside America, can't be more difficult for
American to buy from Europe then for us to buy from USA.
If I understand it right there is no import fee in USA for aircraft
spare part?
My Polish friend recommend the CZ PSRU, after have installed 35 of them
with different PSRU's, there is Polish and German built too.
There is complete German BMW/PSRU for sale for 7000Euro/10300$US but why
pay that much?
Or 15-20K for a ROTAX
if saving 10.000 USD you can buy a lot of gas for that, and a new GPS,
and a single malt for the wife. (they usually don't like it, so you
"have to" drink it)
And the best is this is real HP's not like Continental where you get
about 80-85 HP netto from a O-200 with silencer and alternator
The Polish friend just ask for 85 HP at 6200 RPM (98HP / 7200) with a
2,35 gear ratio, driving a 69"X39" prop, he don't have ground clearance
for bigger prop, but there is other gear ratio too.
He use 10-11 liter/h (2,6-3 GPH)
Jan
----- Original Message -----
From: Noel Loveys
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 4:32 AM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Simply the best engines to use
Who does??? (Sell them) I looked and couldn't find any one. Also
finding a used BMW here is like looking for hen's teeth.
Noel
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of JC
Propeller Design
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 6:19 PM
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Simply the best engines to use
Or you can have a BMW 1100 S 98 HP at just 3000USD complete with PSRU
and electronic fuel injection.
Jan
Ps, and I don't even sell them.
----- Original Message -----
From: jason Parker
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 8:40 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Simply the best engines to use
www.experimentalfuelinjection offers fuel injected engines 914's
starting at 15000USD and kit for fuel injection starting at 4500. We
offer Fuel injection done right. Standard equipment is a wideband 02
sensor and a 55 amp alternator.
Jason Parker
661 428-1850
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matron
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.comhref="h
ttp://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
__________ NOD32 2789 (20080114) Information __________
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-Listhttp://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
__________ NOD32 2791 (20080114) Information __________
Message 47
| 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 selection |
On Jan 14, 2008, at 10:55 PM, Noel Loveys wrote:
> Michel:
> One other point on the cooling. With an air cooled engine, even an
> engine
> which has only air cooled barrels the size and shape of the spinner
> can make
> a considerable difference to your air cooling efficiency.
Very good point, Noel, and thank you for reminding me that: Yes, I use
a Jabiru spinner. As I said earlier; I am not in the business of
experimental aviation; I only want to be up there - it's a magic force
that makes me cry when I am on the ground and see a perfect flying
day's sky calling me: "Come and play in my clouds! See the world from
above ... "
... okay, I am loosing the thread here; what I meant to say is that, if
you want to install safe, install as the Aussies meant it should be:
the propeller, the spinner, the little bolt that you don't know what it
is used for - everything - is part of the propulsion unit. Use it! Some
intelligent people have designed it for you!
Cheers,
Michel Verheughe
Norway
Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200
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! --
|