Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:25 AM - Re: Jabiru (Michel Verheughe)
2. 04:31 AM - Re: Re: Jabiru (W Duke)
3. 07:41 AM - Re: Re: Jabiru (Rueb, Duane)
4. 09:45 AM - Re: Lights (FlyboyTR)
5. 10:18 AM - Re: Jabiru (JetPilot)
6. 10:50 AM - Re: Kitfox-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 09/10/08 (Ed Gray)
7. 10:56 AM - Engines (fox5flyer)
8. 11:42 AM - Re: engine selection (Paul A. Franz, P.E.)
9. 11:42 AM - Re: Re: Kitfox-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 09/10/08 (Lowell Fitt)
10. 11:43 AM - Re: Re: Jabiru (engine choices) (Lowell Fitt)
11. 12:21 PM - Re: Re: Kitfox-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 09/10/08 (Pete Christensen)
12. 01:09 PM - Re: Jabiru (engine choices) (n85ae)
13. 01:20 PM - Re: Lights (Bill Hammond)
14. 02:17 PM - Re: Re: Lights (fox5flyer)
15. 02:25 PM - Re: Jabiru (engine choices) (darinh)
16. 02:59 PM - Re: Re: Jabiru (engine choices) (Cudnohufsky's)
17. 03:06 PM - Re: Re: Jabiru (Lynn Matteson)
18. 03:15 PM - Re: Engines (Lynn Matteson)
19. 03:28 PM - Re: Re: Jabiru (engine choices) (Lynn Matteson)
20. 03:53 PM - Re: Re: Jabiru (engine choices) (Lowell Fitt)
21. 04:34 PM - E-mail-A-Friend: Small plane crashes after short flight (msm_9949@yahoo.com)
22. 05:35 PM - Re: Parting out Model 2 (Bill Malpass)
23. 08:05 PM - Re: Jabiru (darinh)
24. 08:47 PM - tricycle KF 2 (Noel Rodriguez)
25. 09:30 PM - Re: Lights (jlfernan)
26. 09:46 PM - Re: [!! SPAM] Re: Kitfox-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 09/10/08 (Guy Buchanan)
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 |
|
> From: Kitfoxkirk [aviateer@gmail.com]
> They say it is beyond repair and they do not know why. Rotax will not stand
> behind the engine as they say it is out of warranty. It has less than 400
> hours on it.
I am afraid you won't have more luck there with a Jabiru, Kirk. You see, we have
all the fun to practice experimental aviation. But at a cost; we are on our
own.
Because I was so new to aviation, I installed my Jabiru exactly as instructed by
our Scandinavian agent. For example, I have a Jabiru propeller. Lynn and others
on this list will confirm that there are much better propellers on the market.
Perhaps. But in my mind, a propeller is part of the aircraft propulsion unit.
Matching the engine is essential and I don't have the guts to be a test pilot.
On the Jabiru list, I read about pilots who change the carburettor, use electrical
carb heat, shorten or bend the exhaust pipes, extend the propeller flange,
use differents oil coolers, modify their ram air ducts, etc. Gosh, I call that
extreme sport! :-)
Anyway, I understand then that the experimental engine manufacturer finds it difficult
to respect a warranty.
The only reason I fly an experimental aircraft is that it is much cheaper than
a certified one. The reason I choose a Kitfox and then a Jabiru is because less
is more and less is safer. If I wanted high performance, I would have chosen
something different. For me, the fun is to be up there, feeling free like a bird
but also feeling safe.
Cheers,
Michel Verheughe
Norway
Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200 ... flying as PAX
<pre><b><font size=2 color="#000000" face="courier new,courier">
</b></font></pre></body></html>
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 |
|
Not to nitpick but all IO-240s are fuel injected.- That is what the I in
IO is for.- So really the extra 7 grand is just for the FADEC.- I do no
t have the FADEC.
Maxwell Duke
S6/TD/IO240
Dublin, GA
--- On Wed, 9/10/08, fox5flyer <fox5flyer@idealwifi.net> wrote:
From: fox5flyer <fox5flyer@idealwifi.net>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
<fox5flyer@idealwifi.net>
Good info. Thanks Darin.
Deke
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "darinh" <gerns25@netscape.net>
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 6:58 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
<gerns25@netscape.net>
>
> Here is some research I did when deciding which engine I would put on my
> Series 7 for those who are interested.
>
> Rotax
> 912s 141 lbs $19,373
> 914 166 lbs $31,413 (Thank goodness I didn't pay that much!)
>
> Jabiru
> 2200 132 lbs $13,900
> 3300 178 lbs $18,400
>
> Continental (TMX Experimental)
> 0-200 215lbs w/o exhaust $19,435
> IO-240 240 lbs w/o exhaust $20,135 (they also offer a FADEC version
> which is injected and computer controlled...very cool but $27,888.
>
> I ended up going with the 914 because I wanted the best performance
> throughout my flight envelope and this engine fit the bill the best. I
> really like the Jabiru but the fact that it can't swing nearly as big
a
> prop would have limited my climb more than I had wanted. The Continental
s
> are simply too heavy for me. I think for a IV the continental should not
> even be an option due to the weight. I know people have done it but I
> would stay away from it.
>
> I am glad that decision is over...that had to be the hardest one I made
> throughout the process!
>
> As for performance...I don't think I could touch my 914 with any other
> engine. I have seen as high as 1800 ft./min climb and have not hit Vx ye
t
> as the angle is uncomfortably steep. Cruise I get 118 to 120 TAS at
6000'
> @ 5000 rpm and 30" MAP (5000 and 31" is 75%). I suspect the
speed will
> increase 5 mph or so when I get the stabilizer adjustment covers on. I
> think I could increase it another 5 mph if I got rid of my 850s and added
> all the strut fairings but I like the tires and I am sick of building so
> they will have to wait. The best part is that because of the turbo, abov
e
> 12,500' (I fly from a 4500' field elevation) I am faster than my
buddies
> 182 and I can still slow it down like a Kitfox should for landing....I
> love these planes!
>
> --------
> Darin Hawkes
> Series 7 (Phase 1 - Flight Testing)
> 914 Turbo
> Kaysville, Utah
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3706#203706
>
>
>
=0A=0A=0A
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 |
|
Good point on I of the IO. The FADEC is kind of expensive and takes the re
sponsibility of mixture control from the pilot and gives it to the FADEC co
mputer. For $7 grand I can do my own mixture. In fact I would rather do i
t myself.
I love the IO-240; especially now with the 2lb spring in the fuel distribut
or and the fuel pressures properly adjusted, and the bleed hole drilled in
the throttle plate, in other words with the AD mods done, (which would be d
one on a new one. ) I believe that the IO-240 is the best engine available
at the 125hp level, a very nice level for a 5 series or later K-fox. Put
a nice wood prop similar to a Clark Lydek Performance quasi constant speed
in front and enjoy a wonderful flying experience, where you can cruise your
Fox at 125mph and burn a little over 6 gal./hr or burn 4 to 5 gal or less
while just 'putting' around, looking at the wonderful earth below. I must
say, it is a wonderful thing to know that what is up front will keep blowin
g the air needed to keep the pilot cool.
Duane Rueb
N24ZM/IO-240B4B
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-serv
er@matronics.com] On Behalf Of W Duke
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 4:30 AM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
Not to nitpick but all IO-240s are fuel injected. That is what the I in IO
is for. So really the extra 7 grand is just for the FADEC. I do not have
the FADEC.
Maxwell Duke
S6/TD/IO240
Dublin, GA
--- On Wed, 9/10/08, fox5flyer <fox5flyer@idealwifi.net> wrote:
From: fox5flyer <fox5flyer@idealwifi.net>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
<fox5flyer@idealwifi.net>
Good info. Thanks Darin.
Deke
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "darinh" <gerns25@netscape.net>
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 6:58 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
<gerns25@netscape.net>
>
> Here is some research I did when deciding which engine I would put on my
> Series 7 for those who are interested.
>
> Rotax
> 912s 141 lbs $19,373
> 914 166 lbs $31,413 (Thank goodness I didn't pay that much!)
>
> Jabiru
> 2200 132 lbs $13,900
> 3300 178 lbs $18,400
>
> Continental (TMX Experimental)
> 0-200 215lbs w/o exhaust $19,435
> IO-240 240 lbs w/o exhaust $20,135 (they also offer a FADEC version
> which is injected and computer controlled...very cool but $27,888.
>
> I ended up going with the 914 because I wanted the best performance
> throughout my flight envelope and this engine fit the bill the best. I
> really like the Jabiru but the fact that it can't swing nearly as big
a
> prop would have limited my climb more than I had wanted. The Continental
s
> are simply too heavy for me. I think for a IV the continental should not
> even be an option due to the weight. I know people have done it but I
> would stay away from it.
>
> I am glad that decision is over...that had to be the hardest one I made
> throughout the process!
>
> As for performance...I don't think I could touch my 914 with any other
> engine. I have seen as high as 1800 ft./min climb and have not hit Vx ye
t
> as the angle is uncomfortably steep. Cruise I get 118 to 120 TAS at
6000'
> @ 5000 rpm and 30" MAP (5000 and 31" is 75%). I suspect the
speed will
> increase 5 mph or so when I get the stabilizer adjustment covers on. I
> think I could increase it another 5 mph if I got rid of my 850s and added
> all the strut fairings but I like the tires and I am sick of building so
> they will have to wait. The best part is that because of the turbo, abov
e
> 12,500' (I fly from a 4500' field elevation) I am faster than my
buddies
> 182 and I can still slow it down like a Kitfox should for landing....I
> love these planes!
>
> --------
> Darin Hawkes
> Series 7 (Phase 1 - Flight Testing)
> 914 Turbo
> Kaysville, Utah
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3706#203706
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
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 |
|
There are 12 volt, 5mm LED's available on eBay. THe colors red and green are available.
One of our local flyers recently installed an HKS 700 on his Thundergull
and with everything turned on, he was overtaxed on amperage. He ordered
some of the 12 volt LED's and with a little backyard (Experimental) engineering
replaced the incandescent bulbs in in wingtips with several of the LED's.
So far...so good. They look good at night. I think he spent around $20.
Travis :)
--------
Travis Rayner
Mobile, AL
Skystar Vixen, N-789DF
Continental IO-240, Prince P-Tip Prop
ADI-II Autopilot
AnyWhereMap Navigation with weather
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3830#203830
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 |
|
If I was buying a new engine today, I would get the IO240 or the new light sport
Continental they are going to use in the Cessna Sky Catcher. Those motors are
a bit heavy, but I am a light guy so my plane would do fine. It would be worth
it for the reliability and safety of a certified motor. I have owned 4 Continental
motors in the past, two 0200's on 150's and two IO 360 s on a twin,
they were reliable and very easy to maintain.
My Rotax 912 is great, its light, powerful, and runs very smooth, but it takes
a lot more skill and finesse to maintain... Its never missed a beat, but I don't
trust it as much as I would a Continental.
For a very light, inexpensive engine with fuel injection the BMW looks like a really
good possibility. 105 HP, simple, fuel injected, air cooled, and very light.
My friend has one of these on a trike and it is amazing. It has an electronic
hookup so that he just connects his laptop and he can analyze everything
in the engine that quick. I don't have the money and time to develop a new
engine choice for Kitfoxes, but I hope someone does. This could be the new light
alternative we need to older technology Rotax and Jabiru engines. Attached
are a couple pictures.
Mike
--------
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could
have !!!
Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3838#203838
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/bmwengine2_175.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/bmwengine_411.jpg
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | RE: Kitfox-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 09/10/08 |
I'm about ready to cover the fuse of my Kitfox II, ser. No. 605 and making
decision about elevator trim (do I run wire for elec. Or cable for manual
trim like Eurofox. Sonny Logan who built No. 36 two decades ago tells me no
trim needed, just use flaperons. I'm thinking a simple bungee pulling elev.
Tube either way with a small rope and a sailboat clam cleat is the simplest.
Any input appreciated.
Dennis Golden, if you see this, you can practice covering technique on my
bird at no charge. Have you made an engine decision yet?
Do not archive
Ed Gray Dallas KII Rotax 582 GSC 3 blade
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kitfox-List
Digest Server
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 1:59 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 09/10/08
*
=================================================
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
08-09-10&Archive=Kitfox
Text Version:
http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=txt&Chapter
2008-09-10&Archive=Kitfox
===============================================
EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive
===============================================
----------------------------------------------------------
Kitfox-List Digest Archive
---
Total Messages Posted Wed 09/10/08: 25
----------------------------------------------------------
Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:19 AM - Re: Re: Lights (Catz631@aol.com)
2. 05:52 AM - Jabiru (Kirk Martenson)
3. 06:12 AM - Re: Jabiru (Michel Verheughe)
4. 06:46 AM - Re: Jabiru (Jim_and_Lucy Chuk)
5. 07:15 AM - Re: Jabiru (Lowell Fitt)
6. 07:30 AM - Re: Jabiru (JetPilot)
7. 09:06 AM - Re: Jabiru (Rueb, Duane)
8. 09:24 AM - Re: Jabiru (Michel Verheughe)
9. 09:37 AM - Re: Re: Jabiru (Lynn Matteson)
10. 09:46 AM - Re: Re: Jabiru (Michael Gibbs)
11. 10:24 AM - Re: Jabiru (JetPilot)
12. 01:10 PM - Re: Jabiru (Clint Bazzill)
13. 02:22 PM - Re: Jabiru (Lynn Matteson)
14. 03:22 PM - New O200 vs 912 (fox5flyer)
15. 03:58 PM - Re: Jabiru (darinh)
16. 04:20 PM - Re: Re: Jabiru (fox5flyer)
17. 04:35 PM - Re: Jabiru (gary.algate@sandvik.com)
18. 04:42 PM - Re: Re: Jabiru (gary.algate@sandvik.com)
19. 05:03 PM - Re: Re: Jabiru (gary.algate@sandvik.com)
20. 07:45 PM - Re: Jabiru (Kitfoxkirk)
21. 07:45 PM - Re: Re: Lights (Noel Loveys)
22. 07:53 PM - Re: Re: Lights (Noel Loveys)
23. 07:58 PM - Re: Re: Lights (Noel Loveys)
24. 08:03 PM - Re: Jabiru (Michael Gibbs)
25. 09:12 PM - Re: Jabiru (JetPilot)
________________________________ Message 1
_____________________________________
Time: 05:19:20 AM PST US
From: Catz631@aol.com
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Lights
Just sold my Whelen wingtip strobes on Ebay for almost $400. That really
reduced the price of my Aveoflash strobe/running light led units that I
installed
on my aircraft and bought from Spruce ($600 the pair). These self contained
units fastened right to the wingtips with a minimum of effort and I am in
business.All sealed in a lump of plastic with no power pack.It couldn't be
more
simple! Power use is 750 ma for the two. They are bright ! (even with the
leads
attached to a simple 9 volt battery) One of my better purchases(next to
Lowells
trim system--but not that good!)
Dick Maddux
Fox 4-1200
Pensacola,fl
**************Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog,
plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com.
(http://www.stylelist.com/trends?ncid=aolsty00050000000014)
________________________________ Message 2
_____________________________________
Time: 05:52:00 AM PST US
From: "Kirk Martenson" <aviateer@gmail.com>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
I know that there are a few people running the Jabiru in the Kitfox. Does
anyone have a good comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912?
I have a Classic IV with a sick 912. I may be replacing the whole engine and
I am considering the Jabiru.
Thanks
________________________________ Message 3
_____________________________________
Time: 06:12:05 AM PST US
From: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
Subject: Kitfox-List: RE: Jabiru
> From: Kirk Martenson [aviateer@gmail.com]
> I know that there are a few people running the Jabiru in the Kitfox. Does
> anyone have a good comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912?
... you've just opened a can of worms, Kirk! :-)
Before I bought my Jabiru, I saw a nice British comparison done on two
identical
Rans and it looks like the two engines are pretty much a good bargain. The
Jabiru
is simpler and appeals to those who feel that less is more. The only
drawback
is that you'll need to modify your cowling. As for any water-cooled engine,
the forming of the cowling and air chamber inside it, is essential. As for
the small performance details, I'll leave it to others with ditigal gauges
on
each cylinders to answer here. :-)
After 260 hours, I am still pleased with my Jabiru 2200.
Cheers,
Michel Verheughe
Norway
Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200 ... flying as PAX
<pre><b><font size=2 color="#000000" face="courier new,courier">
</b></font></pre>
________________________________ Message 4
_____________________________________
Time: 06:46:25 AM PST US
From: Jim_and_Lucy Chuk <thesupe@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
I have a Jabiru in my Avid MK IV. Takeoff performance is no better than th
e 582 it replaced. cruise speed is about 10 MPH faster than the 582. Fuel
burn per hour is not much better than the 582 at 75 percent power. I have
never flown in an Avid or Kitfox with a 912=2C but everything I read=2C and
from those I've talked to about the 912 performance says it is better than
what I've experienced with my Jabiru. I'm running a fixed pitched 2 blade
64" prop on my Jabiru. A 912 probably will run a 3 blade 68" (or more).
And it will be ground adjustable besides=2C so if you want better cruise o
r better takeoff=2C you can just adjust the prop to suit=2C or if you go wi
th an inflight adjustable you can have both with the flip of a switch and o
n the same flight no less. On the Jabiru=2C tradeing takeoff for cruise or
vice-versa will cost you another $500 or so for a different prop and the h
assle of changeing it. I would stick with the 912=2C especially being you
are all ready set up for it. Just my 2 cents worth=2C Jim Chuk
Avid MK IV flying=2C Kitfox 4 (with 912) building Mn
ist@matronics.comSubject: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
I know that there are a few people running the Jabiru in the Kitfox. Does a
nyone have a good comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912?
I have a Classic IV with a sick 912. I may be replacing the whole engine an
d I am considering the Jabiru.
Thanks
_________________________________________________________________
Want to do more with Windows Live? Learn =9310 hidden secrets=94 from Jamie
..
http://windowslive.com/connect/post/jamiethomson.spaces.live.com-Blog-cns!5
50F681DAD532637!5295.entry?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_domore_092008
________________________________ Message 5
_____________________________________
Time: 07:15:27 AM PST US
From: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
Kirk,
For all the Rotax guys, could you comment on the sickness?
Lowell
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kirk Martenson" <aviateer@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 5:51 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>I know that there are a few people running the Jabiru in the Kitfox. Does
> anyone have a good comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912?
>
> I have a Classic IV with a sick 912. I may be replacing the whole engine
> and
> I am considering the Jabiru.
>
>
> Thanks
>
________________________________ Message 6
_____________________________________
Time: 07:30:49 AM PST US
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
From: "JetPilot" <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
There is no comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912-S. It takes a
heavy,
6 cylinder, 120 horsepower Jabiru to get the same performance as the 100 HP
Rotax 912-S, at the expense of a much increased fuel burn. The Rotax 912-S
is
a much better, more reliable engine design. If you study performance of
aircraft
with these two engines, the Rotax 912-S wins hands down. The Rotax 912-S
is more complicated than the Jabiru to install, but I am willing to do the
work to end up with a better performing and more reliable plane.
The statistic is that better than 80 % of all Light Sport aircraft
manufactured
today use the more expensive Rotax 912-S engine. There is a very good
reason
for this.
Mike
--------
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you
could
have !!!
Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3585#203585
________________________________ Message 7
_____________________________________
Time: 09:06:41 AM PST US
From: "Rueb, Duane" <ruebd@skymail.csus.edu>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
Lowell
Continental has a new version of the O-200. It is being used in Cessnas new
sport
light offering. I would be looking into that one if I were building a K-
IV. I believe that in the long run, it would be cheaper and safer, and then
more
fun.
Duane
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lowell Fitt
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 7:11 AM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
Kirk,
For all the Rotax guys, could you comment on the sickness?
Lowell
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kirk Martenson" <aviateer@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 5:51 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>I know that there are a few people running the Jabiru in the Kitfox. Does
> anyone have a good comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912?
>
> I have a Classic IV with a sick 912. I may be replacing the whole engine
> and
> I am considering the Jabiru.
>
>
> Thanks
>
________________________________ Message 8
_____________________________________
Time: 09:24:33 AM PST US
From: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
> From: JetPilot [orcabonita@hotmail.com]
> The statistic is that better than 80 % of all Light Sport aircraft
manufactured
today
> use the more expensive Rotax 912-S engine. There is a very good reason for
this.
... okay, I understand now why there are wars in the world!
You know what, Mike? Let's all buy only Rotax, Microsoft and Jeppesen! Let's
screw
Jabiru, Apple and PocketFMS! Let the formers be the sole providers and take
whatever they want! Competition is sooooo .... anti-American! Anyway, who is
stupid enough to think that an air-cooled, direct drive boxer engine has
anything
to do with aviation? Stupid Aussies!
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 9
_____________________________________
Time: 09:37:27 AM PST US
From: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
Could part of the reason be that the R engine has been out longer?
MUCH longer?
Check the stats for Australia.
Lynn Matteson
Kitfox IV Speedster
Jabiru 2200, 562 hrs...short block assembled; waiting for heads
Status: "Condition grounded, but determined to try." (Pink
Floyd..."Learning to Fly")
do not archive
On Sep 10, 2008, at 10:30 AM, JetPilot wrote:
>
> There is no comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912-S. It
> takes a heavy, 6 cylinder, 120 horsepower Jabiru to get the same
> performance as the 100 HP Rotax 912-S, at the expense of a much
> increased fuel burn. The Rotax 912-S is a much better, more
> reliable engine design. If you study performance of aircraft with
> these two engines, the Rotax 912-S wins hands down. The Rotax 912-
> S is more complicated than the Jabiru to install, but I am willing
> to do the work to end up with a better performing and more reliable
> plane.
>
> The statistic is that better than 80 % of all Light Sport aircraft
> manufactured today use the more expensive Rotax 912-S engine.
> There is a very good reason for this.
>
> Mike
>
> --------
> "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast
> as you could have !!!
>
> Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3585#203585
>
>
________________________________ Message 10
____________________________________
Time: 09:46:36 AM PST US
From: Michael Gibbs <MichaelGibbs@cox.net>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
Michel,
>You know what, Mike? Let's all buy only Rotax, Microsoft and Jeppesen!
I think what Mike meant is that the 912 is very popular because it is
a strong product (he did admit that 20% don't use it right? :-).
Every decision we make when designing and building airplanes entails
a series of compromises, both technical and financial--there is no
absolutely right or wrong choice for everyone.
Mike G.
N728KF, Kitfox IV-1200 Speedster
Phoenix, AZ
________________________________ Message 11
____________________________________
Time: 10:24:15 AM PST US
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
From: "JetPilot" <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
[quote="Michel"]
>
>
> Competition is sooooo .... anti-American!
>
>
I love to see competition, maybe one day it will get the engine
manufacturers off
their collective arses and start putting Fuel Injection systems on them !
Fuel injection has only been used on the majority of cars for like 30 years
now.
I really like the BMW motorcycle engine, fuel injected, 2 cylinder, air
cooled,
very smooth running, light, and 105 HP. They are putting the BMW's on
Trikes with great success, but I don't know if they would last for many
hours
at high power settings like we would need in an airplane.
Thank god for the Aussies, I love them, without the Jabiru my Rotax 912-S
would
have probably cost me 30,000 instead of 20,000 dollars.
Lycoming has some neat experimental class fuel injected engines in the 115
HP range
that would be a bit heavy, but probably really great motors.
I do think Duane has the best idea of all, the new Continental will probably
be
better, more trouble free, and more reliable than any of our other engine
options.
Now I just need to find a way to come up with another 25 grand [Wink]
Mike
--------
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you
could
have !!!
Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3638#203638
________________________________ Message 12
____________________________________
Time: 01:10:25 PM PST US
From: Clint Bazzill <clint_bazzill@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
That engine weighs 100 lb more then a 912ULS=2C if you want a one place Mod
el IV=2C go for it.
Clint> From: ruebd@skymail.csus.edu> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com> Date: W
ed=2C 10 Sep 2008 09:05:19 -0700> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Jabiru> > --> K
itfox-List message posted by: "Rueb=2C Duane" <ruebd@skymail.csus.edu>> > L
owell> > Continental has a new version of the O-200. It is being used in Ce
ssnas new sport light offering. I would be looking into that one if I were
building a K- IV. I believe that in the long run=2C it would be cheaper and
safer=2C and then more fun.> > Duane> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
-----Original Message-----> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [m
ailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lowell Fitt> Sen
t: Wednesday=2C September 10=2C 2008 7:11 AM> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
owell Fitt" <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>> > Kirk=2C> > For all the Rotax guys=2C
could you comment on the sickness?> > Lowell> > do not archive> ----- Origi
nal Message -----> From: "Kirk Martenson" <aviateer@gmail.com>> To: <kitfox
-list@matronics.com>> Sent: Wednesday=2C September 10=2C 2008 5:51 AM> Subj
ect: Kitfox-List: Jabiru> > > >I know that there are a few people running t
he Jabiru in the Kitfox. Does> > anyone have a good comparison between the
Jabiru and the Rotax 912?> >> > I have a Classic IV with a sick 912. I may
be replacing the whole engine> > and> > I am considering the Jabiru.> >> >>
==============> > >
________________________________ Message 13
____________________________________
Time: 02:22:13 PM PST US
From: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
How heavy is it?
Whaddya mean "more fun"...you ain't HAD fun 'til you've put 'er into
a wheat field!
Lynn Matteson
Kitfox IV Speedster
Jabiru 2200, 562 hrs...engine assembled; waiting for new ignition system
Status: "Condition grounded, but determined to try." (Pink
Floyd..."Learning to Fly")
do not archive
On Sep 10, 2008, at 12:05 PM, Rueb, Duane wrote:
> <ruebd@skymail.csus.edu>
>
> Lowell
>
> Continental has a new version of the O-200. It is being used in
> Cessnas new sport light offering. I would be looking into that one
> if I were building a K- IV. I believe that in the long run, it
> would be cheaper and safer, and then more fun.
>
> Duane
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-
> list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lowell Fitt
> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 7:11 AM
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
> <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
>
> Kirk,
>
> For all the Rotax guys, could you comment on the sickness?
>
> Lowell
>
> do not archive
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kirk Martenson" <aviateer@gmail.com>
> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 5:51 AM
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
>
>> I know that there are a few people running the Jabiru in the
>> Kitfox. Does
>> anyone have a good comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912?
>>
>> I have a Classic IV with a sick 912. I may be replacing the whole
>> engine
>> and
>> I am considering the Jabiru.
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>
>
________________________________ Message 14
____________________________________
Time: 03:22:06 PM PST US
From: "fox5flyer" <fox5flyer@idealwifi.net>
Subject: Kitfox-List: New O200 vs 912
Clint, to help us out here, could you please cite a reference for that
weight please, both the 912 and O200 (new version). Please include with
your figures the weight of the 912 radiator, coolant, hoses, and all
other factors so that apples are equal to apples. Thanks.
Deke Morisse
Mikado Michigan
S5/Subaru/CAP 393+ TT
"The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but
progress."
- Joseph Joubert
----- Original Message -----
From: Clint Bazzill
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 4:08 PM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
That engine weighs 100 lb more then a 912ULS, if you want a one place
Model IV, go for it.
Clint
> From: ruebd@skymail.csus.edu
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 09:05:19 -0700
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
<ruebd@skymail.csus.edu>
>
> Lowell
>
> Continental has a new version of the O-200. It is being used in
Cessnas new sport light offering. I would be looking into that one if I
were building a K- IV. I believe that in the long run, it would be
cheaper and safer, and then more fun.
>
> Duane
________________________________ Message 15
____________________________________
Time: 03:58:59 PM PST US
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
From: "darinh" <gerns25@netscape.net>
Here is some research I did when deciding which engine I would put on my
Series
7 for those who are interested.
Rotax
912s 141 lbs $19,373
914 166 lbs $31,413 (Thank goodness I didn't pay that much!)
Jabiru
2200 132 lbs $13,900
3300 178 lbs $18,400
Continental (TMX Experimental)
0-200 215lbs w/o exhaust $19,435
IO-240 240 lbs w/o exhaust $20,135 (they also offer a FADEC version which
is
injected and computer controlled...very cool but $27,888.
I ended up going with the 914 because I wanted the best performance
throughout
my flight envelope and this engine fit the bill the best. I really like the
Jabiru
but the fact that it can't swing nearly as big a prop would have limited
my climb more than I had wanted. The Continentals are simply too heavy for
me.
I think for a IV the continental should not even be an option due to the
weight.
I know people have done it but I would stay away from it.
I am glad that decision is over...that had to be the hardest one I made
throughout
the process!
As for performance...I don't think I could touch my 914 with any other
engine.
I have seen as high as 1800 ft./min climb and have not hit Vx yet as the
angle
is uncomfortably steep. Cruise I get 118 to 120 TAS at 6000' @ 5000 rpm and
30" MAP (5000 and 31" is 75%). I suspect the speed will increase 5 mph or
so
when I get the stabilizer adjustment covers on. I think I could increase it
another 5 mph if I got rid of my 850s and added all the strut fairings but I
like
the tires and I am sick of building so they will have to wait. The best
part
is that because of the turbo, above 12,500' (I fly from a 4500' field
elevation)
I am faster than my buddies 182 and I can still slow it down like a Kitfox
should for landing....I love these planes!
--------
Darin Hawkes
Series 7 (Phase 1 - Flight Testing)
914 Turbo
Kaysville, Utah
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3706#203706
________________________________ Message 16
____________________________________
Time: 04:20:15 PM PST US
From: "fox5flyer" <fox5flyer@idealwifi.net>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
Good info. Thanks Darin.
Deke
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "darinh" <gerns25@netscape.net>
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 6:58 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
>
> Here is some research I did when deciding which engine I would put on my
> Series 7 for those who are interested.
>
> Rotax
> 912s 141 lbs $19,373
> 914 166 lbs $31,413 (Thank goodness I didn't pay that much!)
>
> Jabiru
> 2200 132 lbs $13,900
> 3300 178 lbs $18,400
>
> Continental (TMX Experimental)
> 0-200 215lbs w/o exhaust $19,435
> IO-240 240 lbs w/o exhaust $20,135 (they also offer a FADEC version
> which is injected and computer controlled...very cool but $27,888.
>
> I ended up going with the 914 because I wanted the best performance
> throughout my flight envelope and this engine fit the bill the best. I
> really like the Jabiru but the fact that it can't swing nearly as big a
> prop would have limited my climb more than I had wanted. The Continentals
> are simply too heavy for me. I think for a IV the continental should not
> even be an option due to the weight. I know people have done it but I
> would stay away from it.
>
> I am glad that decision is over...that had to be the hardest one I made
> throughout the process!
>
> As for performance...I don't think I could touch my 914 with any other
> engine. I have seen as high as 1800 ft./min climb and have not hit Vx yet
> as the angle is uncomfortably steep. Cruise I get 118 to 120 TAS at 6000'
> @ 5000 rpm and 30" MAP (5000 and 31" is 75%). I suspect the speed will
> increase 5 mph or so when I get the stabilizer adjustment covers on. I
> think I could increase it another 5 mph if I got rid of my 850s and added
> all the strut fairings but I like the tires and I am sick of building so
> they will have to wait. The best part is that because of the turbo, above
> 12,500' (I fly from a 4500' field elevation) I am faster than my buddies
> 182 and I can still slow it down like a Kitfox should for landing....I
> love these planes!
>
> --------
> Darin Hawkes
> Series 7 (Phase 1 - Flight Testing)
> 914 Turbo
> Kaysville, Utah
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3706#203706
>
>
>
________________________________ Message 17
____________________________________
Time: 04:35:13 PM PST US
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
From: gary.algate@sandvik.com
Kirk
Difficult for me to give you a subjective comparison as although I have
flown in the 912 Kitfox I have only owned the Jab2200 version and the 582
version.
I will give you some of my figures and maybe you can make your own
comparison:
Plane Classic 4
MT Weight #645
Engine Jabiru2200 (Latest version Solid lifter)
TBO 2,000 Hrs
All performance figures with 3/4 Tanks (18 Imp Galls) and No passenger
22 deg C. ambient
Climb rate WOT 1000 - 1100ft/min]
Cruise (2850 rpm) 105 mph
Fuel consumption at Cruise 3 Galls (Imp) - 3.7 Galls (US)
Pros -
Compact Light weight engine
Air cooled - No hoses or radiators
Direct drive / low revving engine - No Gearbox
Excellent fuel consumption
Runs 100LL or Mogas
Price and component parts pricing much more cost effective than Rotax.
Sound !!!!!!
Cons
Must use fixed pitch prop (to date) which limits diameter you can run.
Both engines are great and I think the application and also availability
of service nearby would be the deciding factor for me
Take off RPM 3050
Gary Algate
SMC, Exploration
Office Phone: +61 8 8276 7655
This e-mail is confidential and it is intended only for the addressees.
Any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message by
persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If
you have received this e-mail in error, kindly notify us immediately by
telephone or e-mail and delete the message from your system. The sender
does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of
this message which may arise as a result of the e-mail transmission.
"Kirk Martenson" <aviateer@gmail.com>
Sent by: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
10/09/2008 10:30 PM
Please respond to
kitfox-list@matronics.com
To
kitfox-list@matronics.com
cc
Subject
Kitfox-List: Jabiru
I know that there are a few people running the Jabiru in the Kitfox. Does
anyone have a good comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912?
I have a Classic IV with a sick 912. I may be replacing the whole engine
and I am considering the Jabiru.
Thanks
________________________________ Message 18
____________________________________
Time: 04:42:07 PM PST US
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
From: gary.algate@sandvik.com
This has started an interesting debate - once again
When I first looked at the 912 and the 912S just about everybody with the
912S installation was having problems with cracking engine mounts and
mufflers due to the high compression and resultant vicious start and stop
sequence. I think the clutch was added to address this but not sure.
On that basis in Canada there was a swing back to the 912.
If you look at the Australian market where there is a strong service base
for the Jabiru engines the percentage of ownership is the reverse of the
numbers you are stating.
Like I said - both great engines
Gary
Gary Algate
Office Phone: +61 8 8276 7655
This e-mail is confidential and it is intended only for the addressees.
Any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message by
persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If
you have received this e-mail in error, kindly notify us immediately by
telephone or e-mail and delete the message from your system. The sender
does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of
this message which may arise as a result of the e-mail transmission.
"JetPilot" <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
Sent by: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
11/09/2008 12:10 AM
Please respond to
kitfox-list@matronics.com
To
kitfox-list@matronics.com
cc
Subject
Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
There is no comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912-S. It takes a
heavy, 6 cylinder, 120 horsepower Jabiru to get the same performance as
the 100 HP Rotax 912-S, at the expense of a much increased fuel burn. The
Rotax 912-S is a much better, more reliable engine design. If you study
performance of aircraft with these two engines, the Rotax 912-S wins hands
down. The Rotax 912-S is more complicated than the Jabiru to install,
but I am willing to do the work to end up with a better performing and
more reliable plane.
The statistic is that better than 80 % of all Light Sport aircraft
manufactured today use the more expensive Rotax 912-S engine. There is a
very good reason for this.
Mike
--------
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you
could have !!!
Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3585#203585
________________________________ Message 19
____________________________________
Time: 05:03:39 PM PST US
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
From: gary.algate@sandvik.com
Jeez Now I want a 914 - sounds like the perfect combo!
Gary
Gary Algate
Jab2200 Classic 4
Office Phone: +61 8 8276 7655
This e-mail is confidential and it is intended only for the addressees.
Any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message by
persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If
you have received this e-mail in error, kindly notify us immediately by
telephone or e-mail and delete the message from your system. The sender
does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of
this message which may arise as a result of the e-mail transmission.
"darinh" <gerns25@netscape.net>
Sent by: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
11/09/2008 08:38 AM
Please respond to
kitfox-list@matronics.com
To
kitfox-list@matronics.com
cc
Subject
Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
Here is some research I did when deciding which engine I would put on my
Series 7 for those who are interested.
Rotax
912s 141 lbs $19,373
914 166 lbs $31,413 (Thank goodness I didn't pay that much!)
Jabiru
2200 132 lbs $13,900
3300 178 lbs $18,400
Continental (TMX Experimental)
0-200 215lbs w/o exhaust $19,435
IO-240 240 lbs w/o exhaust $20,135 (they also offer a FADEC version
which is injected and computer controlled...very cool but $27,888.
I ended up going with the 914 because I wanted the best performance
throughout my flight envelope and this engine fit the bill the best. I
really like the Jabiru but the fact that it can't swing nearly as big a
prop would have limited my climb more than I had wanted. The Continentals
are simply too heavy for me. I think for a IV the continental should not
even be an option due to the weight. I know people have done it but I
would stay away from it.
I am glad that decision is over...that had to be the hardest one I made
throughout the process!
As for performance...I don't think I could touch my 914 with any other
engine. I have seen as high as 1800 ft./min climb and have not hit Vx yet
as the angle is uncomfortably steep. Cruise I get 118 to 120 TAS at 6000'
@ 5000 rpm and 30" MAP (5000 and 31" is 75%). I suspect the speed will
increase 5 mph or so when I get the stabilizer adjustment covers on. I
think I could increase it another 5 mph if I got rid of my 850s and added
all the strut fairings but I like the tires and I am sick of building so
they will have to wait. The best part is that because of the turbo, above
12,500' (I fly from a 4500' field elevation) I am faster than my buddies
182 and I can still slow it down like a Kitfox should for landing....I
love these planes!
--------
Darin Hawkes
Series 7 (Phase 1 - Flight Testing)
914 Turbo
Kaysville, Utah
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3706#203706
________________________________ Message 20
____________________________________
Time: 07:45:50 PM PST US
From: Kitfoxkirk <aviateer@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
Lowell,
I think you guys will remember me. I have been off the list for about 2
years now since my 912 UL Sh*t the bed.
I have tried everything to try to fix the rough running engine (which causes
the carbs to leak gas out of the vent tube while flying). I trailered the
entire aircraft down to a maintenance facility in southern Wisconsin. It has
been there for nearly a year. The engine is now at Leading Edge Air Foils in
Lyons WI and they don't have a clue as to why it is running that way. Eric
Tucker himself looked at this engine and cannot figure it out.
They say it is beyond repair and they do not know why. Rotax will not stand
behind the engine as they say it is out of warranty. It has less than 400
hours on it.
So, I was looking for an alternative to the 912 UL. I would like something
American made. The continental was looking good, but it is too heavy. I was
considering the Jabiru, but the foreign made thing scares me with the parts
and service (been there done that with Rotax).
If Lycoming or Continental made a small 130 lb engine installed, I could
have brought it right over to Buldoc at Anoka here in MN.
If I had the financial backing, I would like to make an engine right here in
MN and sell it for a fair price and service it 100%. I would use "Six Sigma"
and "Lean Manufacturing" Techniques . I would hold true to the "Toyota Way"
(that was really invented by Henry Ford).
I know there is a rotary engine being produced in the USA that is comparable
to the Rotax in weight and horsepower, but I think it is a two stroke, and
it has not been proven.
Maybe I could invent a small 120 hp / 100 pound turbine for the
Kitfox...Hmmmmm. Anyone want to start an engine manufacturing plant with me?
The engine would have to be lubricated with vegetable oil, and run on water.
OK, I'm tired... sorry for the rant.
I will probably purchase another 912UL and hope that this one will
work through to the full TBO.
Kirk
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 9:10 AM, Lowell Fitt <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> Kirk,
>
> For all the Rotax guys, could you comment on the sickness?
>
> Lowell
>
> do not archive
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kirk Martenson" <aviateer@gmail.com>
> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 5:51 AM
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
>
> I know that there are a few people running the Jabiru in the Kitfox. Does
>> anyone have a good comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912?
>>
>> I have a Classic IV with a sick 912. I may be replacing the whole engine
>> and
>> I am considering the Jabiru.
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________ Message 21
____________________________________
Time: 07:45:50 PM PST US
From: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Lights
Spec sheets are most interesting. The LEDs seem to have pretty good voltage
and current flexibility but it is worth noting that they should not be run
in reversed polarity. The junctions also get a lot warmer (well over 100C)
than I would have expected. Light output is quite high and the spectrum
width is still quite narrow. I think these diodes would make good NAV
lights especially if used in multiples of the star or flood configuration.
Thanks This has been most interesting.
Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rick Frederick
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 11:31 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Lights
This may have been mentioned before, or may not even apply...
About 2 years ago I worked with a project that required high intensity
lighting, for this application we used a philips device called 'luxeon
emitters'.
If anyone is interested here is the website:
http://www.lumileds.com/products/line.cfm?lineId=18
Rick, Kitfox IV / 912ul / 50%
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 7:44 PM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Lights
>
> Rick,
>
> "A LED is a LED" is not entirely true unless you are not too interested in
> high light output. High intensity LEDS are a pretty new and exciting
> development. There are LED products on the market now that weren't
> available a year ago. Keep in mind that they are amperage sensitive so
> output will vary with voltage shifts as we put the 12 or 14+ volts
> through them depending on battery condition or charge voltage - hence the
> requirement for a regulated power supply. It's not like buying a couple
> of fifty cent LEDs and putting a resister in the circuit to keep from
> flrying them, unless all you need are low light output panel indicators.
> The Lancair guy, I helped in the build, is in the forefront of LED powered
> fluorescent tube replacement technology here. It won't be long before all
> interior lighting is LED based and the incandescent bulbs, fluorescent
> tubes and twisted bulbs will be in museum displays for our grandkids to
> look at and laugh. These units won't be full of the LEDs available at
> Radio Shack. Again, go to Kitplanes and read the three articles on this
> subject ending with the October issue. The Modules recommended in this
> article are available from Mouser for $9 to $11 a pop depending on color.
> It is interesting that the current requirement varies with color and the
> power supplies are slightly different to provide for that.
>
> Also keep in mind that these are collision avoidance items and light
> output is an important consideration.
>
> Lowell
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "JetPilot" <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 11:29 AM
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Lights
>
>
>>
>> Harry means LED lights, and yes the LED lights made for airplanes are way
>> more expensive than they need to be. I will also be looking for a better
>> cheaper source for the LED lights for my Kitfox. They dont have to be
>> aircraft LED's, an LED is an LED and will last for 50,000 hours or more
>> while consuming only 10 % of the power of a traditional light... As
>> long as I can mount the LED's to the airplane in a nice way I will be
>> happy.
>>
>>
>> Rick,
>>
>> What is Code 3 ???
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> --------
>> "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you
>> could have !!!
>>
>> Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3425#203425
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________ Message 22
____________________________________
Time: 07:53:32 PM PST US
From: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Lights
Gee Michel... You won't know if you're coming or going :-)
Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michel
Verheughe
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 4:07 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Lights
> From: Noel Loveys [noelloveys@yahoo.ca]
> I also have red and green LEDs
> in my lamp posts at the end of the driveway ( red right return same as
> navigation )
Ah, but then you use the IALA system B, my friend! If I ever drive to your
home, I would be confused, accustomed to the European system A that has red
on red and green on green when sailing TOWARD a harbour! :-)
Cheers,
Michel Verheughe
Norway
Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200 .... flying as PAX
Do not archive
<pre><b><font size=2 color="#000000" face="courier new,courier">
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matronics.c
om/Navigator?Kitfox-List</a>
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com</a>
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contri
bution</a>
</b></font></pre>
________________________________ Message 23
____________________________________
Time: 07:58:42 PM PST US
From: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Lights
Nice looking units !
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Catz631@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 9:48 AM
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Lights
Just sold my Whelen wingtip strobes on Ebay for almost $400. That really
reduced the price of my Aveoflash strobe/running light led units that I
installed on my aircraft and bought from Spruce ($600 the pair). These self
contained units fastened right to the wingtips with a minimum of effort and
I am in business.All sealed in a lump of plastic with no power pack.It
couldn't be more simple! Power use is 750 ma for the two. They are bright !
(even with the leads attached to a simple 9 volt battery) One of my better
purchases(next to Lowells trim system--but not that good!)
Dick Maddux
Fox 4-1200
Pensacola,fl
_____
Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new
<http://www.stylelist.com/trends?ncid=aolsty00050000000014> fashion blog,
plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com.
________________________________ Message 24
____________________________________
Time: 08:03:47 PM PST US
From: Michael Gibbs <MichaelGibbs@cox.net>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
Kirk sez:
>Anyone want to start an engine manufacturing plant with me? The
>engine would have to be lubricated with vegetable oil, and run on
>water...
No, but I'll be first in line to buy one from you when you get it
into production!
Mike G.
N728KF, Kitfox IV-1200 Speedster
Phoenix, AZ
Do not archive
________________________________ Message 25
____________________________________
Time: 09:12:08 PM PST US
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
From: "JetPilot" <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
aviateer wrote:
>
> They say it is beyond repair and they do not know why. Rotax will not
stand
behind the engine as they say it is out of warranty. It has less than 400
hours
on it.
>
>
Kirk,
That really sucks. There must be someone somewhere that can figure this
out...
Keep trying, someone will probably hit on it sooner or later. I would
suggest
you call Lockwood Aviation technical support line, and ask for Kerry, he is
their most experienced mechanic. Its a long shot, but if I was in your
situation,
I would be trying anything and everything ( As long as it did not cost to
much money [Wink] ). The call is free..
Mike
--------
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you
could
have !!!
Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3751#203751
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 |
|
Hey, Duano! Good to hear that you're still playing with (my old) your
toy and still hanging out here.
Speaking of FADEC, here's a 95hp engine that is made in Belgium with 4
stroke power that looks very promising for a model IV. 159 lbs dry
weight with all accessories including exhaust. Air cooled and direct
drive.
Deke Morisse
Mikado Michigan
S5/Subaru/CAP 397+ TT
"The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but
progress."
- Joseph Joubert
----- Original Message -----
From: Rueb, Duane
To: 'kitfox-list@matronics.com'
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 10:40 AM
Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
Good point on I of the IO. The FADEC is kind of expensive and takes
the responsibility of mixture control from the pilot and gives it to the
FADEC computer. For $7 grand I can do my own mixture. In fact I would
rather do it myself.
I love the IO-240; especially now with the 2lb spring in the fuel
distributor and the fuel pressures properly adjusted, and the bleed hole
drilled in the throttle plate, in other words with the AD mods done,
(which would be done on a new one. ) I believe that the IO-240 is the
best engine available at the 125hp level, a very nice level for a 5
series or later K-fox. Put a nice wood prop similar to a Clark Lydek
Performance quasi constant speed in front and enjoy a wonderful flying
experience, where you can cruise your Fox at 125mph and burn a little
over 6 gal./hr or burn 4 to 5 gal or less while just 'putting' around,
looking at the wonderful earth below. I must say, it is a wonderful
thing to know that what is up front will keep blowing the air needed to
keep the pilot cool.
Duane Rueb
N24ZM/IO-240B4B
From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of W Duke
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 4:30 AM
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
Not to nitpick but all IO-240s are fuel injected. That is what
the I in IO is for. So really the extra 7 grand is just for the FADEC.
I do not have the FADEC.
Maxwell Duke
S6/TD/IO240
Dublin, GA
--- On Wed, 9/10/08, fox5flyer <fox5flyer@idealwifi.net> wrote:
From: fox5flyer <fox5flyer@idealwifi.net>
Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
Date: Wednesday, September 10, 2008, 7:19 PM
Good info. Thanks Darin.Dekedo not archive ----- Original Message -----
From: "darinh" <gerns25@netscape.net>To:
<kitfox-list@matronics.com>Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 6:58
"darinh"<gerns25@netscape.net>> > Here is some research I did when
deciding which engine I would put on my > Series 7 for those who are
interested.> > Rotax> 912s 141 lbs $19,373> 914 166 lbs
$31,413 (Thank goodness I didn't pay that much!)> > Jabiru> 2200 132
lbs $13,900> 3300 178 lbs $18,400> > Continental (TMX
Experimental)> 0-200 215lbs w/o exhaust $19,435> IO-240 240 lbs w/o
exhaust $20,135 (they also offer a FADEC version > which is injected
and computer controlled...very cool but $27,888.> > I ended up going
with the 914 because I wanted the best performance > throughout my
flight envelope and this engine fit the bill the best. I > really like
the Jabiru but the fact that it can't swing nearly as biga > prop would
have limited my climb more than I had wanted. The Continentals > are
simply too heavy for me. I think for a IV the continental should not >
even be an option due to the weight. I know people have done it but I >
would stay away from it.> > I am glad that decision is over...that had
to be the hardest one I made > throughout the process!> > As for
performance...I don't think I could touch my 914 with any other >
engine. I have seen as high as 1800 ft./min climb and have not hit Vx
yet > as the angle is uncomfortably steep. Cruise I get 118 to 120 TAS
at6000' > @ 5000 rpm and 30" MAP (5000 and 31" is 75%). I suspect
thespeed will > increase 5 mph or so when I get the stabilizer
adjustment covers on. I > think I could increase it another 5 mph if I
got rid of my 850s and added > all the strut fairings but I like the
tires and I am sick of building so > they will have to wait. The best
part is that because of the turbo, above > 12,500' (I fly from a 4500'
field elevation) I am faster than mybuddies > 182 and I can still slow
it down like a Kitfox should for landing....I > love these planes!> >
--------> Darin Hawkes> Series 7 (Phase 1 - Flight Testing)> 914 Turbo>
Kaysville, Utah> > > > > Read this topic online here:> >
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3706#203706> > > > > > >
> > >
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-Listhttp://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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: engine selection |
On Thu, September 11, 2008 10:18 am, JetPilot wrote:
> clip clip
> I don't have the money and time to develop a new engine choice for Kitfoxes,
> but I hope someone does. This could be the new light alternative we need to
older
> technology Rotax and Jabiru engines.
This debate has been going for so long now, it would seem to me that what is needed
is
an airframe design with heavier engines in mind. That is, one with a higher gross
weight such that a useful load for two standard people and 4-6 hours of fuel would
be
perfect while still maintaining a relatively low stall speed and rugged enough
for
some off-airport operations.
Maybe alter a couple of the existing designs for longer wings, slower flight and
thicker wings. I assume the gross weight is determined primarily by wing strength.
I
never see designer/engineer's comments on this list or on usenet so I don't know
what
limits gross weight for the airframe design. Maybe if one were to start the process,
you'd end up with a plane that uses one of the little Rotax two-strokes. IIRC,
gross
weight is determined by wing strength and the loads go up with speed so reducing
the
maximum speed to reduce maximum wing loading negates the need for a heavier engine
and
we're back to the starting point.
> Attached are a couple pictures.
Mike, where were those pictures taken? The foliage looks like it could be around
here
(western Washington) someplace.
--
Paul A. Franz, P.E.
PAF Consulting Engineers
Office 425.440.9505
Cell 425.241.1618
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: RE: Kitfox-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 09/10/08 |
Ed,
Some of the guys are installing an electric trim with a flat elevator -
without ribs, using a bubble to cover the trim servo like is standard on the
Rans. I have the bubbles or can do the whole install if you want. Contact
me off list for info or some tips if you want to do a homebrew.
Lowell
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ed Gray" <egraylaw@swbell.net>
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 10:49 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: RE: Kitfox-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 09/10/08
>
> I'm about ready to cover the fuse of my Kitfox II, ser. No. 605 and making
> decision about elevator trim (do I run wire for elec. Or cable for manual
> trim like Eurofox. Sonny Logan who built No. 36 two decades ago tells me
> no
> trim needed, just use flaperons. I'm thinking a simple bungee pulling
> elev.
> Tube either way with a small rope and a sailboat clam cleat is the
> simplest.
> Any input appreciated.
>
> Dennis Golden, if you see this, you can practice covering technique on my
> bird at no charge. Have you made an engine decision yet?
>
> Do not archive
> Ed Gray Dallas KII Rotax 582 GSC 3 blade
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kitfox-List
> Digest Server
> Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 1:59 AM
> To: Kitfox-List Digest List
> Subject: Kitfox-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 09/10/08
>
> *
>
> =================================================
> 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
> 08-09-10&Archive=Kitfox
>
> Text Version:
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=txt&Chapter
> 2008-09-10&Archive=Kitfox
>
>
> ===============================================
> EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive
> ===============================================
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Kitfox-List Digest Archive
> ---
> Total Messages Posted Wed 09/10/08: 25
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Today's Message Index:
> ----------------------
>
> 1. 05:19 AM - Re: Re: Lights (Catz631@aol.com)
> 2. 05:52 AM - Jabiru (Kirk Martenson)
> 3. 06:12 AM - Re: Jabiru (Michel Verheughe)
> 4. 06:46 AM - Re: Jabiru (Jim_and_Lucy Chuk)
> 5. 07:15 AM - Re: Jabiru (Lowell Fitt)
> 6. 07:30 AM - Re: Jabiru (JetPilot)
> 7. 09:06 AM - Re: Jabiru (Rueb, Duane)
> 8. 09:24 AM - Re: Jabiru (Michel Verheughe)
> 9. 09:37 AM - Re: Re: Jabiru (Lynn Matteson)
> 10. 09:46 AM - Re: Re: Jabiru (Michael Gibbs)
> 11. 10:24 AM - Re: Jabiru (JetPilot)
> 12. 01:10 PM - Re: Jabiru (Clint Bazzill)
> 13. 02:22 PM - Re: Jabiru (Lynn Matteson)
> 14. 03:22 PM - New O200 vs 912 (fox5flyer)
> 15. 03:58 PM - Re: Jabiru (darinh)
> 16. 04:20 PM - Re: Re: Jabiru (fox5flyer)
> 17. 04:35 PM - Re: Jabiru (gary.algate@sandvik.com)
> 18. 04:42 PM - Re: Re: Jabiru (gary.algate@sandvik.com)
> 19. 05:03 PM - Re: Re: Jabiru (gary.algate@sandvik.com)
> 20. 07:45 PM - Re: Jabiru (Kitfoxkirk)
> 21. 07:45 PM - Re: Re: Lights (Noel Loveys)
> 22. 07:53 PM - Re: Re: Lights (Noel Loveys)
> 23. 07:58 PM - Re: Re: Lights (Noel Loveys)
> 24. 08:03 PM - Re: Jabiru (Michael Gibbs)
> 25. 09:12 PM - Re: Jabiru (JetPilot)
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 1
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 05:19:20 AM PST US
> From: Catz631@aol.com
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Lights
>
> Just sold my Whelen wingtip strobes on Ebay for almost $400. That really
> reduced the price of my Aveoflash strobe/running light led units that I
> installed
>
> on my aircraft and bought from Spruce ($600 the pair). These self
> contained
> units fastened right to the wingtips with a minimum of effort and I am in
> business.All sealed in a lump of plastic with no power pack.It couldn't be
> more
>
> simple! Power use is 750 ma for the two. They are bright ! (even with the
> leads
>
> attached to a simple 9 volt battery) One of my better purchases(next to
> Lowells
>
> trim system--but not that good!)
> Dick Maddux
> Fox 4-1200
> Pensacola,fl
>
>
> **************Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion
> blog,
> plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com.
> (http://www.stylelist.com/trends?ncid=aolsty00050000000014)
>
> ________________________________ Message 2
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 05:52:00 AM PST US
> From: "Kirk Martenson" <aviateer@gmail.com>
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
> I know that there are a few people running the Jabiru in the Kitfox. Does
> anyone have a good comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912?
>
> I have a Classic IV with a sick 912. I may be replacing the whole engine
> and
> I am considering the Jabiru.
>
>
> Thanks
>
> ________________________________ Message 3
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 06:12:05 AM PST US
> From: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
> Subject: Kitfox-List: RE: Jabiru
>
>> From: Kirk Martenson [aviateer@gmail.com]
>> I know that there are a few people running the Jabiru in the Kitfox. Does
>> anyone have a good comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912?
>
> ... you've just opened a can of worms, Kirk! :-)
> Before I bought my Jabiru, I saw a nice British comparison done on two
> identical
> Rans and it looks like the two engines are pretty much a good bargain. The
> Jabiru
> is simpler and appeals to those who feel that less is more. The only
> drawback
> is that you'll need to modify your cowling. As for any water-cooled
> engine,
> the forming of the cowling and air chamber inside it, is essential. As for
> the small performance details, I'll leave it to others with ditigal gauges
> on
> each cylinders to answer here. :-)
> After 260 hours, I am still pleased with my Jabiru 2200.
>
> Cheers,
> Michel Verheughe
> Norway
> Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200 ... flying as PAX
>
>
> <pre><b><font size=2 color="#000000" face="courier new,courier">
>
>
> </b></font></pre>
>
> ________________________________ Message 4
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 06:46:25 AM PST US
> From: Jim_and_Lucy Chuk <thesupe@hotmail.com>
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
>
> I have a Jabiru in my Avid MK IV. Takeoff performance is no better than
> th
> e 582 it replaced. cruise speed is about 10 MPH faster than the 582. Fuel
> burn per hour is not much better than the 582 at 75 percent power. I have
> never flown in an Avid or Kitfox with a 912=2C but everything I read=2C
> and
> from those I've talked to about the 912 performance says it is better than
> what I've experienced with my Jabiru. I'm running a fixed pitched 2 blade
> 64" prop on my Jabiru. A 912 probably will run a 3 blade 68" (or more).
> And it will be ground adjustable besides=2C so if you want better cruise o
> r better takeoff=2C you can just adjust the prop to suit=2C or if you go
> wi
> th an inflight adjustable you can have both with the flip of a switch and
> o
> n the same flight no less. On the Jabiru=2C tradeing takeoff for cruise
> or
> vice-versa will cost you another $500 or so for a different prop and the h
> assle of changeing it. I would stick with the 912=2C especially being you
> are all ready set up for it. Just my 2 cents worth=2C Jim Chuk
> Avid MK IV flying=2C Kitfox 4 (with 912) building Mn
>
>
> ist@matronics.comSubject: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
> I know that there are a few people running the Jabiru in the Kitfox. Does
> a
> nyone have a good comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912?
>
> I have a Classic IV with a sick 912. I may be replacing the whole engine
> an
> d I am considering the Jabiru.
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Want to do more with Windows Live? Learn =9310 hidden secrets=94 from
> Jamie
> ..
> http://windowslive.com/connect/post/jamiethomson.spaces.live.com-Blog-cns!5
> 50F681DAD532637!5295.entry?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_domore_092008
>
> ________________________________ Message 5
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 07:15:27 AM PST US
> From: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
>
> Kirk,
>
> For all the Rotax guys, could you comment on the sickness?
>
> Lowell
>
> do not archive
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kirk Martenson" <aviateer@gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 5:51 AM
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
>
>>I know that there are a few people running the Jabiru in the Kitfox. Does
>> anyone have a good comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912?
>>
>> I have a Classic IV with a sick 912. I may be replacing the whole engine
>> and
>> I am considering the Jabiru.
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 6
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 07:30:49 AM PST US
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
> From: "JetPilot" <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
>
>
> There is no comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912-S. It takes a
> heavy,
> 6 cylinder, 120 horsepower Jabiru to get the same performance as the 100
> HP
> Rotax 912-S, at the expense of a much increased fuel burn. The Rotax
> 912-S
> is
> a much better, more reliable engine design. If you study performance of
> aircraft
> with these two engines, the Rotax 912-S wins hands down. The Rotax 912-S
> is more complicated than the Jabiru to install, but I am willing to do the
> work to end up with a better performing and more reliable plane.
>
> The statistic is that better than 80 % of all Light Sport aircraft
> manufactured
> today use the more expensive Rotax 912-S engine. There is a very good
> reason
> for this.
>
> Mike
>
> --------
> "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you
> could
> have !!!
>
> Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3585#203585
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 7
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 09:06:41 AM PST US
> From: "Rueb, Duane" <ruebd@skymail.csus.edu>
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
>
> Lowell
>
> Continental has a new version of the O-200. It is being used in Cessnas
> new
> sport
> light offering. I would be looking into that one if I were building a K-
> IV. I believe that in the long run, it would be cheaper and safer, and
> then
> more
> fun.
>
> Duane
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lowell Fitt
> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 7:11 AM
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
>
> Kirk,
>
> For all the Rotax guys, could you comment on the sickness?
>
> Lowell
>
> do not archive
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kirk Martenson" <aviateer@gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 5:51 AM
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
>
>>I know that there are a few people running the Jabiru in the Kitfox. Does
>> anyone have a good comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912?
>>
>> I have a Classic IV with a sick 912. I may be replacing the whole engine
>> and
>> I am considering the Jabiru.
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 8
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 09:24:33 AM PST US
> From: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
>
>> From: JetPilot [orcabonita@hotmail.com]
>> The statistic is that better than 80 % of all Light Sport aircraft
> manufactured
> today
>> use the more expensive Rotax 912-S engine. There is a very good reason
>> for
> this.
>
> ... okay, I understand now why there are wars in the world!
> You know what, Mike? Let's all buy only Rotax, Microsoft and Jeppesen!
> Let's
> screw
> Jabiru, Apple and PocketFMS! Let the formers be the sole providers and
> take
> whatever they want! Competition is sooooo .... anti-American! Anyway, who
> is
> stupid enough to think that an air-cooled, direct drive boxer engine has
> anything
> to do with aviation? Stupid Aussies!
>
> 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 9
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 09:37:27 AM PST US
> From: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
>
>
> Could part of the reason be that the R engine has been out longer?
> MUCH longer?
> Check the stats for Australia.
>
> Lynn Matteson
> Kitfox IV Speedster
> Jabiru 2200, 562 hrs...short block assembled; waiting for heads
> Status: "Condition grounded, but determined to try." (Pink
> Floyd..."Learning to Fly")
> do not archive
>
>
> On Sep 10, 2008, at 10:30 AM, JetPilot wrote:
>
>>
>> There is no comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912-S. It
>> takes a heavy, 6 cylinder, 120 horsepower Jabiru to get the same
>> performance as the 100 HP Rotax 912-S, at the expense of a much
>> increased fuel burn. The Rotax 912-S is a much better, more
>> reliable engine design. If you study performance of aircraft with
>> these two engines, the Rotax 912-S wins hands down. The Rotax 912-
>> S is more complicated than the Jabiru to install, but I am willing
>> to do the work to end up with a better performing and more reliable
>> plane.
>>
>> The statistic is that better than 80 % of all Light Sport aircraft
>> manufactured today use the more expensive Rotax 912-S engine.
>> There is a very good reason for this.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> --------
>> "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast
>> as you could have !!!
>>
>> Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3585#203585
>>
>>
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 10
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 09:46:36 AM PST US
> From: Michael Gibbs <MichaelGibbs@cox.net>
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
>
>
> Michel,
>
>>You know what, Mike? Let's all buy only Rotax, Microsoft and Jeppesen!
>
> I think what Mike meant is that the 912 is very popular because it is
> a strong product (he did admit that 20% don't use it right? :-).
> Every decision we make when designing and building airplanes entails
> a series of compromises, both technical and financial--there is no
> absolutely right or wrong choice for everyone.
>
> Mike G.
> N728KF, Kitfox IV-1200 Speedster
> Phoenix, AZ
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 11
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 10:24:15 AM PST US
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
> From: "JetPilot" <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
>
>
> [quote="Michel"]
>>
>>
>> Competition is sooooo .... anti-American!
>>
>>
>
>
> I love to see competition, maybe one day it will get the engine
> manufacturers off
> their collective arses and start putting Fuel Injection systems on them !
> Fuel injection has only been used on the majority of cars for like 30
> years
> now.
> I really like the BMW motorcycle engine, fuel injected, 2 cylinder, air
> cooled,
> very smooth running, light, and 105 HP. They are putting the BMW's on
> Trikes with great success, but I don't know if they would last for many
> hours
> at high power settings like we would need in an airplane.
>
> Thank god for the Aussies, I love them, without the Jabiru my Rotax 912-S
> would
> have probably cost me 30,000 instead of 20,000 dollars.
>
> Lycoming has some neat experimental class fuel injected engines in the 115
> HP range
> that would be a bit heavy, but probably really great motors.
>
> I do think Duane has the best idea of all, the new Continental will
> probably
> be
> better, more trouble free, and more reliable than any of our other engine
> options.
> Now I just need to find a way to come up with another 25 grand [Wink]
>
>
> Mike
>
> --------
> "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you
> could
> have !!!
>
> Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3638#203638
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 12
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 01:10:25 PM PST US
> From: Clint Bazzill <clint_bazzill@hotmail.com>
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
>
> That engine weighs 100 lb more then a 912ULS=2C if you want a one place
> Mod
> el IV=2C go for it.
>
> Clint> From: ruebd@skymail.csus.edu> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com> Date:
> W
> ed=2C 10 Sep 2008 09:05:19 -0700> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Jabiru> > -->
> K
> itfox-List message posted by: "Rueb=2C Duane" <ruebd@skymail.csus.edu>> >
> L
> owell> > Continental has a new version of the O-200. It is being used in
> Ce
> ssnas new sport light offering. I would be looking into that one if I were
> building a K- IV. I believe that in the long run=2C it would be cheaper
> and
> safer=2C and then more fun.> > Duane> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> -----Original Message-----> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [m
> ailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lowell Fitt>
> Sen
> t: Wednesday=2C September 10=2C 2008 7:11 AM> To:
> kitfox-list@matronics.com
> owell Fitt" <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>> > Kirk=2C> > For all the Rotax guys=2C
> could you comment on the sickness?> > Lowell> > do not archive> -----
> Origi
> nal Message -----> From: "Kirk Martenson" <aviateer@gmail.com>> To:
> <kitfox
> -list@matronics.com>> Sent: Wednesday=2C September 10=2C 2008 5:51 AM>
> Subj
> ect: Kitfox-List: Jabiru> > > >I know that there are a few people running
> t
> he Jabiru in the Kitfox. Does> > anyone have a good comparison between the
> Jabiru and the Rotax 912?> >> > I have a Classic IV with a sick 912. I may
> be replacing the whole engine> > and> > I am considering the Jabiru.> >>
> >>
> ==============> > >
>
> ________________________________ Message 13
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 02:22:13 PM PST US
> From: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
>
> How heavy is it?
>
> Whaddya mean "more fun"...you ain't HAD fun 'til you've put 'er into
> a wheat field!
>
> Lynn Matteson
> Kitfox IV Speedster
> Jabiru 2200, 562 hrs...engine assembled; waiting for new ignition system
> Status: "Condition grounded, but determined to try." (Pink
> Floyd..."Learning to Fly")
> do not archive
>
>
> On Sep 10, 2008, at 12:05 PM, Rueb, Duane wrote:
>
>> <ruebd@skymail.csus.edu>
>>
>> Lowell
>>
>> Continental has a new version of the O-200. It is being used in
>> Cessnas new sport light offering. I would be looking into that one
>> if I were building a K- IV. I believe that in the long run, it
>> would be cheaper and safer, and then more fun.
>>
>> Duane
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-
>> list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lowell Fitt
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 7:11 AM
>> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>>
>> <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
>>
>> Kirk,
>>
>> For all the Rotax guys, could you comment on the sickness?
>>
>> Lowell
>>
>> do not archive
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Kirk Martenson" <aviateer@gmail.com>
>> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 5:51 AM
>> Subject: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>>
>>
>>> I know that there are a few people running the Jabiru in the
>>> Kitfox. Does
>>> anyone have a good comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912?
>>>
>>> I have a Classic IV with a sick 912. I may be replacing the whole
>>> engine
>>> and
>>> I am considering the Jabiru.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 14
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 03:22:06 PM PST US
> From: "fox5flyer" <fox5flyer@idealwifi.net>
> Subject: Kitfox-List: New O200 vs 912
>
> Clint, to help us out here, could you please cite a reference for that
> weight please, both the 912 and O200 (new version). Please include with
> your figures the weight of the 912 radiator, coolant, hoses, and all
> other factors so that apples are equal to apples. Thanks.
> Deke Morisse
> Mikado Michigan
> S5/Subaru/CAP 393+ TT
> "The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but
> progress."
> - Joseph Joubert
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Clint Bazzill
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 4:08 PM
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
>
> That engine weighs 100 lb more then a 912ULS, if you want a one place
> Model IV, go for it.
>
> Clint
>
> > From: ruebd@skymail.csus.edu
> > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> > Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 09:05:19 -0700
> > Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
> >
> <ruebd@skymail.csus.edu>
> >
> > Lowell
> >
> > Continental has a new version of the O-200. It is being used in
> Cessnas new sport light offering. I would be looking into that one if I
> were building a K- IV. I believe that in the long run, it would be
> cheaper and safer, and then more fun.
> >
> > Duane
>
> ________________________________ Message 15
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 03:58:59 PM PST US
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
> From: "darinh" <gerns25@netscape.net>
>
>
> Here is some research I did when deciding which engine I would put on my
> Series
> 7 for those who are interested.
>
> Rotax
> 912s 141 lbs $19,373
> 914 166 lbs $31,413 (Thank goodness I didn't pay that much!)
>
> Jabiru
> 2200 132 lbs $13,900
> 3300 178 lbs $18,400
>
> Continental (TMX Experimental)
> 0-200 215lbs w/o exhaust $19,435
> IO-240 240 lbs w/o exhaust $20,135 (they also offer a FADEC version
> which
> is
> injected and computer controlled...very cool but $27,888.
>
> I ended up going with the 914 because I wanted the best performance
> throughout
> my flight envelope and this engine fit the bill the best. I really like
> the
> Jabiru
> but the fact that it can't swing nearly as big a prop would have limited
> my climb more than I had wanted. The Continentals are simply too heavy
> for
> me.
> I think for a IV the continental should not even be an option due to the
> weight.
> I know people have done it but I would stay away from it.
>
> I am glad that decision is over...that had to be the hardest one I made
> throughout
> the process!
>
> As for performance...I don't think I could touch my 914 with any other
> engine.
> I have seen as high as 1800 ft./min climb and have not hit Vx yet as the
> angle
> is uncomfortably steep. Cruise I get 118 to 120 TAS at 6000' @ 5000 rpm
> and
> 30" MAP (5000 and 31" is 75%). I suspect the speed will increase 5 mph or
> so
> when I get the stabilizer adjustment covers on. I think I could increase
> it
> another 5 mph if I got rid of my 850s and added all the strut fairings but
> I
> like
> the tires and I am sick of building so they will have to wait. The best
> part
> is that because of the turbo, above 12,500' (I fly from a 4500' field
> elevation)
> I am faster than my buddies 182 and I can still slow it down like a Kitfox
> should for landing....I love these planes!
>
> --------
> Darin Hawkes
> Series 7 (Phase 1 - Flight Testing)
> 914 Turbo
> Kaysville, Utah
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3706#203706
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 16
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 04:20:15 PM PST US
> From: "fox5flyer" <fox5flyer@idealwifi.net>
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
>
>
> Good info. Thanks Darin.
> Deke
> do not archive
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "darinh" <gerns25@netscape.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 6:58 PM
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
>
>
>>
>> Here is some research I did when deciding which engine I would put on my
>> Series 7 for those who are interested.
>>
>> Rotax
>> 912s 141 lbs $19,373
>> 914 166 lbs $31,413 (Thank goodness I didn't pay that much!)
>>
>> Jabiru
>> 2200 132 lbs $13,900
>> 3300 178 lbs $18,400
>>
>> Continental (TMX Experimental)
>> 0-200 215lbs w/o exhaust $19,435
>> IO-240 240 lbs w/o exhaust $20,135 (they also offer a FADEC version
>> which is injected and computer controlled...very cool but $27,888.
>>
>> I ended up going with the 914 because I wanted the best performance
>> throughout my flight envelope and this engine fit the bill the best. I
>> really like the Jabiru but the fact that it can't swing nearly as big a
>> prop would have limited my climb more than I had wanted. The
>> Continentals
>
>> are simply too heavy for me. I think for a IV the continental should not
>> even be an option due to the weight. I know people have done it but I
>> would stay away from it.
>>
>> I am glad that decision is over...that had to be the hardest one I made
>> throughout the process!
>>
>> As for performance...I don't think I could touch my 914 with any other
>> engine. I have seen as high as 1800 ft./min climb and have not hit Vx
>> yet
>
>> as the angle is uncomfortably steep. Cruise I get 118 to 120 TAS at
>> 6000'
>
>> @ 5000 rpm and 30" MAP (5000 and 31" is 75%). I suspect the speed will
>> increase 5 mph or so when I get the stabilizer adjustment covers on. I
>> think I could increase it another 5 mph if I got rid of my 850s and added
>> all the strut fairings but I like the tires and I am sick of building so
>> they will have to wait. The best part is that because of the turbo,
>> above
>
>> 12,500' (I fly from a 4500' field elevation) I am faster than my buddies
>> 182 and I can still slow it down like a Kitfox should for landing....I
>> love these planes!
>>
>> --------
>> Darin Hawkes
>> Series 7 (Phase 1 - Flight Testing)
>> 914 Turbo
>> Kaysville, Utah
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3706#203706
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 17
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 04:35:13 PM PST US
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
> From: gary.algate@sandvik.com
>
> Kirk
>
> Difficult for me to give you a subjective comparison as although I have
> flown in the 912 Kitfox I have only owned the Jab2200 version and the 582
> version.
>
> I will give you some of my figures and maybe you can make your own
> comparison:
>
> Plane Classic 4
> MT Weight #645
> Engine Jabiru2200 (Latest version Solid lifter)
> TBO 2,000 Hrs
>
> All performance figures with 3/4 Tanks (18 Imp Galls) and No passenger
> 22 deg C. ambient
>
> Climb rate WOT 1000 - 1100ft/min]
> Cruise (2850 rpm) 105 mph
> Fuel consumption at Cruise 3 Galls (Imp) - 3.7 Galls (US)
>
> Pros -
>
> Compact Light weight engine
> Air cooled - No hoses or radiators
> Direct drive / low revving engine - No Gearbox
> Excellent fuel consumption
> Runs 100LL or Mogas
> Price and component parts pricing much more cost effective than Rotax.
> Sound !!!!!!
>
> Cons
>
> Must use fixed pitch prop (to date) which limits diameter you can run.
>
> Both engines are great and I think the application and also availability
> of service nearby would be the deciding factor for me
>
>
> Take off RPM 3050
>
>
> Gary Algate
> SMC, Exploration
> Office Phone: +61 8 8276 7655
>
>
> This e-mail is confidential and it is intended only for the addressees.
> Any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message by
> persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If
> you have received this e-mail in error, kindly notify us immediately by
> telephone or e-mail and delete the message from your system. The sender
> does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of
> this message which may arise as a result of the e-mail transmission.
>
>
> "Kirk Martenson" <aviateer@gmail.com>
> Sent by: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> 10/09/2008 10:30 PM
> Please respond to
> kitfox-list@matronics.com
>
> To
> kitfox-list@matronics.com
> cc
>
> Subject
> Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
>
> I know that there are a few people running the Jabiru in the Kitfox. Does
> anyone have a good comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912?
>
> I have a Classic IV with a sick 912. I may be replacing the whole engine
> and I am considering the Jabiru.
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 18
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 04:42:07 PM PST US
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
> From: gary.algate@sandvik.com
>
> This has started an interesting debate - once again
>
> When I first looked at the 912 and the 912S just about everybody with the
> 912S installation was having problems with cracking engine mounts and
> mufflers due to the high compression and resultant vicious start and stop
> sequence. I think the clutch was added to address this but not sure.
>
> On that basis in Canada there was a swing back to the 912.
>
> If you look at the Australian market where there is a strong service base
> for the Jabiru engines the percentage of ownership is the reverse of the
> numbers you are stating.
>
> Like I said - both great engines
>
> Gary
>
> Gary Algate
>
> Office Phone: +61 8 8276 7655
>
>
> This e-mail is confidential and it is intended only for the addressees.
> Any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message by
> persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If
> you have received this e-mail in error, kindly notify us immediately by
> telephone or e-mail and delete the message from your system. The sender
> does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of
> this message which may arise as a result of the e-mail transmission.
>
>
> "JetPilot" <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
> Sent by: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> 11/09/2008 12:10 AM
> Please respond to
> kitfox-list@matronics.com
>
> To
> kitfox-list@matronics.com
> cc
>
> Subject
> Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
>
>
> There is no comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912-S. It takes a
> heavy, 6 cylinder, 120 horsepower Jabiru to get the same performance as
> the 100 HP Rotax 912-S, at the expense of a much increased fuel burn. The
> Rotax 912-S is a much better, more reliable engine design. If you study
> performance of aircraft with these two engines, the Rotax 912-S wins hands
> down. The Rotax 912-S is more complicated than the Jabiru to install,
> but I am willing to do the work to end up with a better performing and
> more reliable plane.
>
> The statistic is that better than 80 % of all Light Sport aircraft
> manufactured today use the more expensive Rotax 912-S engine. There is a
> very good reason for this.
>
> Mike
>
> --------
> "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you
> could have !!!
>
> Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3585#203585
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 19
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 05:03:39 PM PST US
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
> From: gary.algate@sandvik.com
>
> Jeez Now I want a 914 - sounds like the perfect combo!
>
> Gary
>
> Gary Algate
> Jab2200 Classic 4
> Office Phone: +61 8 8276 7655
>
>
> This e-mail is confidential and it is intended only for the addressees.
> Any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message by
> persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If
> you have received this e-mail in error, kindly notify us immediately by
> telephone or e-mail and delete the message from your system. The sender
> does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of
> this message which may arise as a result of the e-mail transmission.
>
>
> "darinh" <gerns25@netscape.net>
> Sent by: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> 11/09/2008 08:38 AM
> Please respond to
> kitfox-list@matronics.com
>
> To
> kitfox-list@matronics.com
> cc
>
> Subject
> Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
>
>
> Here is some research I did when deciding which engine I would put on my
> Series 7 for those who are interested.
>
> Rotax
> 912s 141 lbs $19,373
> 914 166 lbs $31,413 (Thank goodness I didn't pay that much!)
>
> Jabiru
> 2200 132 lbs $13,900
> 3300 178 lbs $18,400
>
> Continental (TMX Experimental)
> 0-200 215lbs w/o exhaust $19,435
> IO-240 240 lbs w/o exhaust $20,135 (they also offer a FADEC version
> which is injected and computer controlled...very cool but $27,888.
>
> I ended up going with the 914 because I wanted the best performance
> throughout my flight envelope and this engine fit the bill the best. I
> really like the Jabiru but the fact that it can't swing nearly as big a
> prop would have limited my climb more than I had wanted. The Continentals
> are simply too heavy for me. I think for a IV the continental should not
> even be an option due to the weight. I know people have done it but I
> would stay away from it.
>
> I am glad that decision is over...that had to be the hardest one I made
> throughout the process!
>
> As for performance...I don't think I could touch my 914 with any other
> engine. I have seen as high as 1800 ft./min climb and have not hit Vx yet
> as the angle is uncomfortably steep. Cruise I get 118 to 120 TAS at 6000'
> @ 5000 rpm and 30" MAP (5000 and 31" is 75%). I suspect the speed will
> increase 5 mph or so when I get the stabilizer adjustment covers on. I
> think I could increase it another 5 mph if I got rid of my 850s and added
> all the strut fairings but I like the tires and I am sick of building so
> they will have to wait. The best part is that because of the turbo, above
> 12,500' (I fly from a 4500' field elevation) I am faster than my buddies
> 182 and I can still slow it down like a Kitfox should for landing....I
> love these planes!
>
> --------
> Darin Hawkes
> Series 7 (Phase 1 - Flight Testing)
> 914 Turbo
> Kaysville, Utah
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3706#203706
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 20
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 07:45:50 PM PST US
> From: Kitfoxkirk <aviateer@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
> Lowell,
>
> I think you guys will remember me. I have been off the list for about 2
> years now since my 912 UL Sh*t the bed.
>
> I have tried everything to try to fix the rough running engine (which
> causes
> the carbs to leak gas out of the vent tube while flying). I trailered the
> entire aircraft down to a maintenance facility in southern Wisconsin. It
> has
> been there for nearly a year. The engine is now at Leading Edge Air Foils
> in
> Lyons WI and they don't have a clue as to why it is running that way. Eric
> Tucker himself looked at this engine and cannot figure it out.
>
> They say it is beyond repair and they do not know why. Rotax will not
> stand
> behind the engine as they say it is out of warranty. It has less than 400
> hours on it.
>
> So, I was looking for an alternative to the 912 UL. I would like something
> American made. The continental was looking good, but it is too heavy. I
> was
> considering the Jabiru, but the foreign made thing scares me with the
> parts
> and service (been there done that with Rotax).
>
> If Lycoming or Continental made a small 130 lb engine installed, I could
> have brought it right over to Buldoc at Anoka here in MN.
>
> If I had the financial backing, I would like to make an engine right here
> in
> MN and sell it for a fair price and service it 100%. I would use "Six
> Sigma"
> and "Lean Manufacturing" Techniques . I would hold true to the "Toyota
> Way"
> (that was really invented by Henry Ford).
>
> I know there is a rotary engine being produced in the USA that is
> comparable
> to the Rotax in weight and horsepower, but I think it is a two stroke, and
> it has not been proven.
>
> Maybe I could invent a small 120 hp / 100 pound turbine for the
> Kitfox...Hmmmmm. Anyone want to start an engine manufacturing plant with
> me?
> The engine would have to be lubricated with vegetable oil, and run on
> water.
> OK, I'm tired... sorry for the rant.
> I will probably purchase another 912UL and hope that this one will
> work through to the full TBO.
>
> Kirk
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 9:10 AM, Lowell Fitt <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> Kirk,
>>
>> For all the Rotax guys, could you comment on the sickness?
>>
>> Lowell
>>
>> do not archive
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kirk Martenson" <aviateer@gmail.com>
>> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 5:51 AM
>> Subject: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>>
>>
>> I know that there are a few people running the Jabiru in the Kitfox. Does
>>> anyone have a good comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912?
>>>
>>> I have a Classic IV with a sick 912. I may be replacing the whole engine
>>> and
>>> I am considering the Jabiru.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> ________________________________ Message 21
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 07:45:50 PM PST US
> From: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Lights
>
>
> Spec sheets are most interesting. The LEDs seem to have pretty good
> voltage
> and current flexibility but it is worth noting that they should not be run
> in reversed polarity. The junctions also get a lot warmer (well over
> 100C)
> than I would have expected. Light output is quite high and the spectrum
> width is still quite narrow. I think these diodes would make good NAV
> lights especially if used in multiples of the star or flood configuration.
>
> Thanks This has been most interesting.
>
> Noel
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rick
> Frederick
> Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 11:31 PM
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Lights
>
>
> This may have been mentioned before, or may not even apply...
>
> About 2 years ago I worked with a project that required high intensity
> lighting, for this application we used a philips device called 'luxeon
> emitters'.
> If anyone is interested here is the website:
> http://www.lumileds.com/products/line.cfm?lineId=18
>
> Rick, Kitfox IV / 912ul / 50%
> do not archive
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 7:44 PM
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Lights
>
>
>>
>> Rick,
>>
>> "A LED is a LED" is not entirely true unless you are not too interested
>> in
>
>> high light output. High intensity LEDS are a pretty new and exciting
>> development. There are LED products on the market now that weren't
>> available a year ago. Keep in mind that they are amperage sensitive so
>> output will vary with voltage shifts as we put the 12 or 14+ volts
>> through them depending on battery condition or charge voltage - hence the
>> requirement for a regulated power supply. It's not like buying a
>> couple
>
>> of fifty cent LEDs and putting a resister in the circuit to keep from
>> flrying them, unless all you need are low light output panel indicators.
>> The Lancair guy, I helped in the build, is in the forefront of LED
>> powered
>
>> fluorescent tube replacement technology here. It won't be long before
>> all
>
>> interior lighting is LED based and the incandescent bulbs, fluorescent
>> tubes and twisted bulbs will be in museum displays for our grandkids to
>> look at and laugh. These units won't be full of the LEDs available at
>> Radio Shack. Again, go to Kitplanes and read the three articles on this
>> subject ending with the October issue. The Modules recommended in this
>> article are available from Mouser for $9 to $11 a pop depending on color.
>> It is interesting that the current requirement varies with color and the
>> power supplies are slightly different to provide for that.
>>
>> Also keep in mind that these are collision avoidance items and light
>> output is an important consideration.
>>
>> Lowell
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "JetPilot" <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
>> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 11:29 AM
>> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Lights
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Harry means LED lights, and yes the LED lights made for airplanes are
>>> way
>
>>> more expensive than they need to be. I will also be looking for a
>>> better
>
>>> cheaper source for the LED lights for my Kitfox. They dont have to be
>>> aircraft LED's, an LED is an LED and will last for 50,000 hours or more
>>> while consuming only 10 % of the power of a traditional light... As
>>> long as I can mount the LED's to the airplane in a nice way I will be
>>> happy.
>>>
>>>
>>> Rick,
>>>
>>> What is Code 3 ???
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>>> --------
>>> "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you
>>> could have !!!
>>>
>>> Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>
>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3425#203425
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 22
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 07:53:32 PM PST US
> From: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Lights
>
>
> Gee Michel... You won't know if you're coming or going :-)
>
> Noel
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michel
> Verheughe
> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 4:07 AM
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Lights
>
>> From: Noel Loveys [noelloveys@yahoo.ca]
>> I also have red and green LEDs
>> in my lamp posts at the end of the driveway ( red right return same as
>> navigation )
>
> Ah, but then you use the IALA system B, my friend! If I ever drive to your
> home, I would be confused, accustomed to the European system A that has
> red
> on red and green on green when sailing TOWARD a harbour! :-)
>
> Cheers,
> Michel Verheughe
> Norway
> Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200 .... flying as PAX
> Do not archive
>
>
> <pre><b><font size=2 color="#000000" face="courier new,courier">
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matronics.c
> om/Navigator?Kitfox-List</a>
> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com</a>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contri
> bution</a>
>
> </b></font></pre>
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 23
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 07:58:42 PM PST US
> From: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Lights
>
> Nice looking units !
>
>
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Catz631@aol.com
> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 9:48 AM
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Lights
>
>
> Just sold my Whelen wingtip strobes on Ebay for almost $400. That really
> reduced the price of my Aveoflash strobe/running light led units that I
> installed on my aircraft and bought from Spruce ($600 the pair). These
> self
> contained units fastened right to the wingtips with a minimum of effort
> and
> I am in business.All sealed in a lump of plastic with no power pack.It
> couldn't be more simple! Power use is 750 ma for the two. They are bright
> !
> (even with the leads attached to a simple 9 volt battery) One of my better
> purchases(next to Lowells trim system--but not that good!)
>
> Dick Maddux
>
> Fox 4-1200
>
> Pensacola,fl
>
>
> _____
>
> Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new
> <http://www.stylelist.com/trends?ncid=aolsty00050000000014> fashion blog,
> plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com.
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 24
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 08:03:47 PM PST US
> From: Michael Gibbs <MichaelGibbs@cox.net>
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
>
> Kirk sez:
>
>>Anyone want to start an engine manufacturing plant with me? The
>>engine would have to be lubricated with vegetable oil, and run on
>>water...
>
> No, but I'll be first in line to buy one from you when you get it
> into production!
>
> Mike G.
> N728KF, Kitfox IV-1200 Speedster
> Phoenix, AZ
>
> Do not archive
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 25
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 09:12:08 PM PST US
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
> From: "JetPilot" <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
>
>
> aviateer wrote:
>>
>> They say it is beyond repair and they do not know why. Rotax will not
> stand
> behind the engine as they say it is out of warranty. It has less than 400
> hours
> on it.
>>
>>
>
>
> Kirk,
>
> That really sucks. There must be someone somewhere that can figure this
> out...
> Keep trying, someone will probably hit on it sooner or later. I would
> suggest
> you call Lockwood Aviation technical support line, and ask for Kerry, he
> is
> their most experienced mechanic. Its a long shot, but if I was in your
> situation,
> I would be trying anything and everything ( As long as it did not cost to
> much money [Wink] ). The call is free..
>
> Mike
>
> --------
> "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you
> could
> have !!!
>
> Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3751#203751
>
>
>
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: Jabiru (engine choices) |
Mike,
(You say) "My Rotax 912 is great, its light, powerful, and runs very
smooth, but it takes a lot more skill and finesse to maintain... "
I ran my 912 for 900 hours before it kissed the ground and all I did was
change the oil every 50 hours and plugs maybe every 150 or so. The coolant
was changed out each year. It never used a drop of oil, nor coolant for
that matter. Maybe I'm just a techno-nerd, but I didn't find that
maintenance routine challenging at all. The stator? Yes I did that, but I
always considered that a blessing from the factory. Yes, they do support
the engines - free parts and free loan of tools not to mention the very
quick heads-up regarding the possible issues involved. It cost me a total
of four hours work.
Regarding heavy engines, I have thought for a long time that the Model IV
is the finest product ever produced in the Kitfox line. It surprises me how
cheaply a partially completed kit can be picked up today given the growing
scarcity. The main reason for this thinking is the engine choices. The
912UL is a perfect match. The 912ULS goes beyond perfect and then there is
the 914. The Jabiru is a viable alternative as are a few others. But with
the grown up versions of the Kitfox now available, there is no clear engine
choice, largely, in my opinion, because there is no engine that will give
the power it needs without adding undesirable weight. I just did a couple
of quick calculations and with a 625 lb. Model IV, the power to weight ratio
with the 80 hp Rotax is about 7.8. With a 800 lb Series ?, and that is
lower than most come in - many in the 900+ pound range, the power to weight
ratio with the 912ULS is 8.0. Any significant performance enhancements have
to be attributed to a cleaner airplane which is doable on any of the models.
I suspect that a clean Model IV will arrive within just a few minutes of a
Series ?, but will get off quicker, land shorter and be much more nimble at
the controls.
I guess it all boils down to perceived preferences and what each person
regards as important. There are lots of posts that refer to the simplicity
of the Jabiru with no liquid cooling. Then comes the posts talking about
the importance of proper baffeling after posts referring to cooling issues.
I find that baffeling. I installed the baffeling on the Lancair IV I helped
with and believe me it is much easier to install a radiator and a few hoses
than all that sheet metal with the numerous nutplates in preparation for
those all too frequent annual inspections. But, again, to each his own, I
guess.
Lowell
----- Original Message -----
From: "JetPilot" <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 10:18 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
>
> >
> My Rotax 912 is great, its light, powerful, and runs very smooth, but it
> takes a lot more skill and finesse to maintain... Its never missed a
> beat, but I don't trust it as much as I would a Continental.
>
> For a very light, inexpensive engine with fuel injection the BMW looks
> like a really good possibility. 105 HP, simple, fuel injected, air
> cooled, and very light. My friend has one of these on a trike and it is
> amazing. It has an electronic hookup so that he just connects his laptop
> and he can analyze everything in the engine that quick. I don't have the
> money and time to develop a new engine choice for Kitfoxes, but I hope
> someone does. This could be the new light alternative we need to older
> technology Rotax and Jabiru engines. Attached are a couple pictures.
>
> Mike
>
> --------
> "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you
> could have !!!
>
> Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3838#203838
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/bmwengine2_175.jpg
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/bmwengine_411.jpg
>
>
>
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RE: Kitfox-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 09/10/08 |
My III trims just fine with flaps.
Pete
Hell Paso, TX ,912, sn 1000
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ed Gray" <egraylaw@swbell.net>
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 11:49 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: RE: Kitfox-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 09/10/08
>
> I'm about ready to cover the fuse of my Kitfox II, ser. No. 605 and making
> decision about elevator trim (do I run wire for elec. Or cable for manual
> trim like Eurofox. Sonny Logan who built No. 36 two decades ago tells me
> no
> trim needed, just use flaperons. I'm thinking a simple bungee pulling
> elev.
> Tube either way with a small rope and a sailboat clam cleat is the
> simplest.
> Any input appreciated.
>
> Dennis Golden, if you see this, you can practice covering technique on my
> bird at no charge. Have you made an engine decision yet?
>
> Do not archive
> Ed Gray Dallas KII Rotax 582 GSC 3 blade
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kitfox-List
> Digest Server
> Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 1:59 AM
> To: Kitfox-List Digest List
> Subject: Kitfox-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 09/10/08
>
> *
>
> =================================================
> 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
> 08-09-10&Archive=Kitfox
>
> Text Version:
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=txt&Chapter
> 2008-09-10&Archive=Kitfox
>
>
> ===============================================
> EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive
> ===============================================
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Kitfox-List Digest Archive
> ---
> Total Messages Posted Wed 09/10/08: 25
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Today's Message Index:
> ----------------------
>
> 1. 05:19 AM - Re: Re: Lights (Catz631@aol.com)
> 2. 05:52 AM - Jabiru (Kirk Martenson)
> 3. 06:12 AM - Re: Jabiru (Michel Verheughe)
> 4. 06:46 AM - Re: Jabiru (Jim_and_Lucy Chuk)
> 5. 07:15 AM - Re: Jabiru (Lowell Fitt)
> 6. 07:30 AM - Re: Jabiru (JetPilot)
> 7. 09:06 AM - Re: Jabiru (Rueb, Duane)
> 8. 09:24 AM - Re: Jabiru (Michel Verheughe)
> 9. 09:37 AM - Re: Re: Jabiru (Lynn Matteson)
> 10. 09:46 AM - Re: Re: Jabiru (Michael Gibbs)
> 11. 10:24 AM - Re: Jabiru (JetPilot)
> 12. 01:10 PM - Re: Jabiru (Clint Bazzill)
> 13. 02:22 PM - Re: Jabiru (Lynn Matteson)
> 14. 03:22 PM - New O200 vs 912 (fox5flyer)
> 15. 03:58 PM - Re: Jabiru (darinh)
> 16. 04:20 PM - Re: Re: Jabiru (fox5flyer)
> 17. 04:35 PM - Re: Jabiru (gary.algate@sandvik.com)
> 18. 04:42 PM - Re: Re: Jabiru (gary.algate@sandvik.com)
> 19. 05:03 PM - Re: Re: Jabiru (gary.algate@sandvik.com)
> 20. 07:45 PM - Re: Jabiru (Kitfoxkirk)
> 21. 07:45 PM - Re: Re: Lights (Noel Loveys)
> 22. 07:53 PM - Re: Re: Lights (Noel Loveys)
> 23. 07:58 PM - Re: Re: Lights (Noel Loveys)
> 24. 08:03 PM - Re: Jabiru (Michael Gibbs)
> 25. 09:12 PM - Re: Jabiru (JetPilot)
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 1
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 05:19:20 AM PST US
> From: Catz631@aol.com
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Lights
>
> Just sold my Whelen wingtip strobes on Ebay for almost $400. That really
> reduced the price of my Aveoflash strobe/running light led units that I
> installed
>
> on my aircraft and bought from Spruce ($600 the pair). These self
> contained
> units fastened right to the wingtips with a minimum of effort and I am in
> business.All sealed in a lump of plastic with no power pack.It couldn't be
> more
>
> simple! Power use is 750 ma for the two. They are bright ! (even with the
> leads
>
> attached to a simple 9 volt battery) One of my better purchases(next to
> Lowells
>
> trim system--but not that good!)
> Dick Maddux
> Fox 4-1200
> Pensacola,fl
>
>
> **************Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion
> blog,
> plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com.
> (http://www.stylelist.com/trends?ncid=aolsty00050000000014)
>
> ________________________________ Message 2
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 05:52:00 AM PST US
> From: "Kirk Martenson" <aviateer@gmail.com>
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
> I know that there are a few people running the Jabiru in the Kitfox. Does
> anyone have a good comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912?
>
> I have a Classic IV with a sick 912. I may be replacing the whole engine
> and
> I am considering the Jabiru.
>
>
> Thanks
>
> ________________________________ Message 3
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 06:12:05 AM PST US
> From: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
> Subject: Kitfox-List: RE: Jabiru
>
>> From: Kirk Martenson [aviateer@gmail.com]
>> I know that there are a few people running the Jabiru in the Kitfox. Does
>> anyone have a good comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912?
>
> ... you've just opened a can of worms, Kirk! :-)
> Before I bought my Jabiru, I saw a nice British comparison done on two
> identical
> Rans and it looks like the two engines are pretty much a good bargain. The
> Jabiru
> is simpler and appeals to those who feel that less is more. The only
> drawback
> is that you'll need to modify your cowling. As for any water-cooled
> engine,
> the forming of the cowling and air chamber inside it, is essential. As for
> the small performance details, I'll leave it to others with ditigal gauges
> on
> each cylinders to answer here. :-)
> After 260 hours, I am still pleased with my Jabiru 2200.
>
> Cheers,
> Michel Verheughe
> Norway
> Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200 ... flying as PAX
>
>
> <pre><b><font size=2 color="#000000" face="courier new,courier">
>
>
> </b></font></pre>
>
> ________________________________ Message 4
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 06:46:25 AM PST US
> From: Jim_and_Lucy Chuk <thesupe@hotmail.com>
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
>
> I have a Jabiru in my Avid MK IV. Takeoff performance is no better than
> th
> e 582 it replaced. cruise speed is about 10 MPH faster than the 582. Fuel
> burn per hour is not much better than the 582 at 75 percent power. I have
> never flown in an Avid or Kitfox with a 912=2C but everything I read=2C
> and
> from those I've talked to about the 912 performance says it is better than
> what I've experienced with my Jabiru. I'm running a fixed pitched 2 blade
> 64" prop on my Jabiru. A 912 probably will run a 3 blade 68" (or more).
> And it will be ground adjustable besides=2C so if you want better cruise o
> r better takeoff=2C you can just adjust the prop to suit=2C or if you go
> wi
> th an inflight adjustable you can have both with the flip of a switch and
> o
> n the same flight no less. On the Jabiru=2C tradeing takeoff for cruise
> or
> vice-versa will cost you another $500 or so for a different prop and the h
> assle of changeing it. I would stick with the 912=2C especially being you
> are all ready set up for it. Just my 2 cents worth=2C Jim Chuk
> Avid MK IV flying=2C Kitfox 4 (with 912) building Mn
>
>
> ist@matronics.comSubject: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
> I know that there are a few people running the Jabiru in the Kitfox. Does
> a
> nyone have a good comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912?
>
> I have a Classic IV with a sick 912. I may be replacing the whole engine
> an
> d I am considering the Jabiru.
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Want to do more with Windows Live? Learn =9310 hidden secrets=94 from
> Jamie
> ..
> http://windowslive.com/connect/post/jamiethomson.spaces.live.com-Blog-cns!5
> 50F681DAD532637!5295.entry?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_domore_092008
>
> ________________________________ Message 5
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 07:15:27 AM PST US
> From: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
>
> Kirk,
>
> For all the Rotax guys, could you comment on the sickness?
>
> Lowell
>
> do not archive
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kirk Martenson" <aviateer@gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 5:51 AM
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
>
>>I know that there are a few people running the Jabiru in the Kitfox. Does
>> anyone have a good comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912?
>>
>> I have a Classic IV with a sick 912. I may be replacing the whole engine
>> and
>> I am considering the Jabiru.
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 6
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 07:30:49 AM PST US
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
> From: "JetPilot" <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
>
>
> There is no comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912-S. It takes a
> heavy,
> 6 cylinder, 120 horsepower Jabiru to get the same performance as the 100
> HP
> Rotax 912-S, at the expense of a much increased fuel burn. The Rotax
> 912-S
> is
> a much better, more reliable engine design. If you study performance of
> aircraft
> with these two engines, the Rotax 912-S wins hands down. The Rotax 912-S
> is more complicated than the Jabiru to install, but I am willing to do the
> work to end up with a better performing and more reliable plane.
>
> The statistic is that better than 80 % of all Light Sport aircraft
> manufactured
> today use the more expensive Rotax 912-S engine. There is a very good
> reason
> for this.
>
> Mike
>
> --------
> "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you
> could
> have !!!
>
> Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3585#203585
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 7
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 09:06:41 AM PST US
> From: "Rueb, Duane" <ruebd@skymail.csus.edu>
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
>
> Lowell
>
> Continental has a new version of the O-200. It is being used in Cessnas
> new
> sport
> light offering. I would be looking into that one if I were building a K-
> IV. I believe that in the long run, it would be cheaper and safer, and
> then
> more
> fun.
>
> Duane
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lowell Fitt
> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 7:11 AM
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
>
> Kirk,
>
> For all the Rotax guys, could you comment on the sickness?
>
> Lowell
>
> do not archive
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kirk Martenson" <aviateer@gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 5:51 AM
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
>
>>I know that there are a few people running the Jabiru in the Kitfox. Does
>> anyone have a good comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912?
>>
>> I have a Classic IV with a sick 912. I may be replacing the whole engine
>> and
>> I am considering the Jabiru.
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 8
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 09:24:33 AM PST US
> From: Michel Verheughe <michel@online.no>
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
>
>> From: JetPilot [orcabonita@hotmail.com]
>> The statistic is that better than 80 % of all Light Sport aircraft
> manufactured
> today
>> use the more expensive Rotax 912-S engine. There is a very good reason
>> for
> this.
>
> ... okay, I understand now why there are wars in the world!
> You know what, Mike? Let's all buy only Rotax, Microsoft and Jeppesen!
> Let's
> screw
> Jabiru, Apple and PocketFMS! Let the formers be the sole providers and
> take
> whatever they want! Competition is sooooo .... anti-American! Anyway, who
> is
> stupid enough to think that an air-cooled, direct drive boxer engine has
> anything
> to do with aviation? Stupid Aussies!
>
> 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 9
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 09:37:27 AM PST US
> From: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
>
>
> Could part of the reason be that the R engine has been out longer?
> MUCH longer?
> Check the stats for Australia.
>
> Lynn Matteson
> Kitfox IV Speedster
> Jabiru 2200, 562 hrs...short block assembled; waiting for heads
> Status: "Condition grounded, but determined to try." (Pink
> Floyd..."Learning to Fly")
> do not archive
>
>
> On Sep 10, 2008, at 10:30 AM, JetPilot wrote:
>
>>
>> There is no comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912-S. It
>> takes a heavy, 6 cylinder, 120 horsepower Jabiru to get the same
>> performance as the 100 HP Rotax 912-S, at the expense of a much
>> increased fuel burn. The Rotax 912-S is a much better, more
>> reliable engine design. If you study performance of aircraft with
>> these two engines, the Rotax 912-S wins hands down. The Rotax 912-
>> S is more complicated than the Jabiru to install, but I am willing
>> to do the work to end up with a better performing and more reliable
>> plane.
>>
>> The statistic is that better than 80 % of all Light Sport aircraft
>> manufactured today use the more expensive Rotax 912-S engine.
>> There is a very good reason for this.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> --------
>> "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast
>> as you could have !!!
>>
>> Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3585#203585
>>
>>
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 10
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 09:46:36 AM PST US
> From: Michael Gibbs <MichaelGibbs@cox.net>
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
>
>
> Michel,
>
>>You know what, Mike? Let's all buy only Rotax, Microsoft and Jeppesen!
>
> I think what Mike meant is that the 912 is very popular because it is
> a strong product (he did admit that 20% don't use it right? :-).
> Every decision we make when designing and building airplanes entails
> a series of compromises, both technical and financial--there is no
> absolutely right or wrong choice for everyone.
>
> Mike G.
> N728KF, Kitfox IV-1200 Speedster
> Phoenix, AZ
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 11
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 10:24:15 AM PST US
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
> From: "JetPilot" <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
>
>
> [quote="Michel"]
>>
>>
>> Competition is sooooo .... anti-American!
>>
>>
>
>
> I love to see competition, maybe one day it will get the engine
> manufacturers off
> their collective arses and start putting Fuel Injection systems on them !
> Fuel injection has only been used on the majority of cars for like 30
> years
> now.
> I really like the BMW motorcycle engine, fuel injected, 2 cylinder, air
> cooled,
> very smooth running, light, and 105 HP. They are putting the BMW's on
> Trikes with great success, but I don't know if they would last for many
> hours
> at high power settings like we would need in an airplane.
>
> Thank god for the Aussies, I love them, without the Jabiru my Rotax 912-S
> would
> have probably cost me 30,000 instead of 20,000 dollars.
>
> Lycoming has some neat experimental class fuel injected engines in the 115
> HP range
> that would be a bit heavy, but probably really great motors.
>
> I do think Duane has the best idea of all, the new Continental will
> probably
> be
> better, more trouble free, and more reliable than any of our other engine
> options.
> Now I just need to find a way to come up with another 25 grand [Wink]
>
>
> Mike
>
> --------
> "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you
> could
> have !!!
>
> Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3638#203638
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 12
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 01:10:25 PM PST US
> From: Clint Bazzill <clint_bazzill@hotmail.com>
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
>
> That engine weighs 100 lb more then a 912ULS=2C if you want a one place
> Mod
> el IV=2C go for it.
>
> Clint> From: ruebd@skymail.csus.edu> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com> Date:
> W
> ed=2C 10 Sep 2008 09:05:19 -0700> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Jabiru> > -->
> K
> itfox-List message posted by: "Rueb=2C Duane" <ruebd@skymail.csus.edu>> >
> L
> owell> > Continental has a new version of the O-200. It is being used in
> Ce
> ssnas new sport light offering. I would be looking into that one if I were
> building a K- IV. I believe that in the long run=2C it would be cheaper
> and
> safer=2C and then more fun.> > Duane> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> -----Original Message-----> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [m
> ailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lowell Fitt>
> Sen
> t: Wednesday=2C September 10=2C 2008 7:11 AM> To:
> kitfox-list@matronics.com
> owell Fitt" <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>> > Kirk=2C> > For all the Rotax guys=2C
> could you comment on the sickness?> > Lowell> > do not archive> -----
> Origi
> nal Message -----> From: "Kirk Martenson" <aviateer@gmail.com>> To:
> <kitfox
> -list@matronics.com>> Sent: Wednesday=2C September 10=2C 2008 5:51 AM>
> Subj
> ect: Kitfox-List: Jabiru> > > >I know that there are a few people running
> t
> he Jabiru in the Kitfox. Does> > anyone have a good comparison between the
> Jabiru and the Rotax 912?> >> > I have a Classic IV with a sick 912. I may
> be replacing the whole engine> > and> > I am considering the Jabiru.> >>
> >>
> ==============> > >
>
> ________________________________ Message 13
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 02:22:13 PM PST US
> From: Lynn Matteson <lynnmatt@jps.net>
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
>
> How heavy is it?
>
> Whaddya mean "more fun"...you ain't HAD fun 'til you've put 'er into
> a wheat field!
>
> Lynn Matteson
> Kitfox IV Speedster
> Jabiru 2200, 562 hrs...engine assembled; waiting for new ignition system
> Status: "Condition grounded, but determined to try." (Pink
> Floyd..."Learning to Fly")
> do not archive
>
>
> On Sep 10, 2008, at 12:05 PM, Rueb, Duane wrote:
>
>> <ruebd@skymail.csus.edu>
>>
>> Lowell
>>
>> Continental has a new version of the O-200. It is being used in
>> Cessnas new sport light offering. I would be looking into that one
>> if I were building a K- IV. I believe that in the long run, it
>> would be cheaper and safer, and then more fun.
>>
>> Duane
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-
>> list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lowell Fitt
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 7:11 AM
>> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>>
>> <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
>>
>> Kirk,
>>
>> For all the Rotax guys, could you comment on the sickness?
>>
>> Lowell
>>
>> do not archive
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Kirk Martenson" <aviateer@gmail.com>
>> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 5:51 AM
>> Subject: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>>
>>
>>> I know that there are a few people running the Jabiru in the
>>> Kitfox. Does
>>> anyone have a good comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912?
>>>
>>> I have a Classic IV with a sick 912. I may be replacing the whole
>>> engine
>>> and
>>> I am considering the Jabiru.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 14
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 03:22:06 PM PST US
> From: "fox5flyer" <fox5flyer@idealwifi.net>
> Subject: Kitfox-List: New O200 vs 912
>
> Clint, to help us out here, could you please cite a reference for that
> weight please, both the 912 and O200 (new version). Please include with
> your figures the weight of the 912 radiator, coolant, hoses, and all
> other factors so that apples are equal to apples. Thanks.
> Deke Morisse
> Mikado Michigan
> S5/Subaru/CAP 393+ TT
> "The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but
> progress."
> - Joseph Joubert
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Clint Bazzill
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 4:08 PM
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
>
> That engine weighs 100 lb more then a 912ULS, if you want a one place
> Model IV, go for it.
>
> Clint
>
> > From: ruebd@skymail.csus.edu
> > To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> > Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 09:05:19 -0700
> > Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
> >
> <ruebd@skymail.csus.edu>
> >
> > Lowell
> >
> > Continental has a new version of the O-200. It is being used in
> Cessnas new sport light offering. I would be looking into that one if I
> were building a K- IV. I believe that in the long run, it would be
> cheaper and safer, and then more fun.
> >
> > Duane
>
> ________________________________ Message 15
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 03:58:59 PM PST US
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
> From: "darinh" <gerns25@netscape.net>
>
>
> Here is some research I did when deciding which engine I would put on my
> Series
> 7 for those who are interested.
>
> Rotax
> 912s 141 lbs $19,373
> 914 166 lbs $31,413 (Thank goodness I didn't pay that much!)
>
> Jabiru
> 2200 132 lbs $13,900
> 3300 178 lbs $18,400
>
> Continental (TMX Experimental)
> 0-200 215lbs w/o exhaust $19,435
> IO-240 240 lbs w/o exhaust $20,135 (they also offer a FADEC version
> which
> is
> injected and computer controlled...very cool but $27,888.
>
> I ended up going with the 914 because I wanted the best performance
> throughout
> my flight envelope and this engine fit the bill the best. I really like
> the
> Jabiru
> but the fact that it can't swing nearly as big a prop would have limited
> my climb more than I had wanted. The Continentals are simply too heavy
> for
> me.
> I think for a IV the continental should not even be an option due to the
> weight.
> I know people have done it but I would stay away from it.
>
> I am glad that decision is over...that had to be the hardest one I made
> throughout
> the process!
>
> As for performance...I don't think I could touch my 914 with any other
> engine.
> I have seen as high as 1800 ft./min climb and have not hit Vx yet as the
> angle
> is uncomfortably steep. Cruise I get 118 to 120 TAS at 6000' @ 5000 rpm
> and
> 30" MAP (5000 and 31" is 75%). I suspect the speed will increase 5 mph or
> so
> when I get the stabilizer adjustment covers on. I think I could increase
> it
> another 5 mph if I got rid of my 850s and added all the strut fairings but
> I
> like
> the tires and I am sick of building so they will have to wait. The best
> part
> is that because of the turbo, above 12,500' (I fly from a 4500' field
> elevation)
> I am faster than my buddies 182 and I can still slow it down like a Kitfox
> should for landing....I love these planes!
>
> --------
> Darin Hawkes
> Series 7 (Phase 1 - Flight Testing)
> 914 Turbo
> Kaysville, Utah
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3706#203706
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 16
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 04:20:15 PM PST US
> From: "fox5flyer" <fox5flyer@idealwifi.net>
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
>
>
> Good info. Thanks Darin.
> Deke
> do not archive
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "darinh" <gerns25@netscape.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 6:58 PM
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
>
>
>>
>> Here is some research I did when deciding which engine I would put on my
>> Series 7 for those who are interested.
>>
>> Rotax
>> 912s 141 lbs $19,373
>> 914 166 lbs $31,413 (Thank goodness I didn't pay that much!)
>>
>> Jabiru
>> 2200 132 lbs $13,900
>> 3300 178 lbs $18,400
>>
>> Continental (TMX Experimental)
>> 0-200 215lbs w/o exhaust $19,435
>> IO-240 240 lbs w/o exhaust $20,135 (they also offer a FADEC version
>> which is injected and computer controlled...very cool but $27,888.
>>
>> I ended up going with the 914 because I wanted the best performance
>> throughout my flight envelope and this engine fit the bill the best. I
>> really like the Jabiru but the fact that it can't swing nearly as big a
>> prop would have limited my climb more than I had wanted. The
>> Continentals
>
>> are simply too heavy for me. I think for a IV the continental should not
>> even be an option due to the weight. I know people have done it but I
>> would stay away from it.
>>
>> I am glad that decision is over...that had to be the hardest one I made
>> throughout the process!
>>
>> As for performance...I don't think I could touch my 914 with any other
>> engine. I have seen as high as 1800 ft./min climb and have not hit Vx
>> yet
>
>> as the angle is uncomfortably steep. Cruise I get 118 to 120 TAS at
>> 6000'
>
>> @ 5000 rpm and 30" MAP (5000 and 31" is 75%). I suspect the speed will
>> increase 5 mph or so when I get the stabilizer adjustment covers on. I
>> think I could increase it another 5 mph if I got rid of my 850s and added
>> all the strut fairings but I like the tires and I am sick of building so
>> they will have to wait. The best part is that because of the turbo,
>> above
>
>> 12,500' (I fly from a 4500' field elevation) I am faster than my buddies
>> 182 and I can still slow it down like a Kitfox should for landing....I
>> love these planes!
>>
>> --------
>> Darin Hawkes
>> Series 7 (Phase 1 - Flight Testing)
>> 914 Turbo
>> Kaysville, Utah
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3706#203706
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 17
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 04:35:13 PM PST US
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
> From: gary.algate@sandvik.com
>
> Kirk
>
> Difficult for me to give you a subjective comparison as although I have
> flown in the 912 Kitfox I have only owned the Jab2200 version and the 582
> version.
>
> I will give you some of my figures and maybe you can make your own
> comparison:
>
> Plane Classic 4
> MT Weight #645
> Engine Jabiru2200 (Latest version Solid lifter)
> TBO 2,000 Hrs
>
> All performance figures with 3/4 Tanks (18 Imp Galls) and No passenger
> 22 deg C. ambient
>
> Climb rate WOT 1000 - 1100ft/min]
> Cruise (2850 rpm) 105 mph
> Fuel consumption at Cruise 3 Galls (Imp) - 3.7 Galls (US)
>
> Pros -
>
> Compact Light weight engine
> Air cooled - No hoses or radiators
> Direct drive / low revving engine - No Gearbox
> Excellent fuel consumption
> Runs 100LL or Mogas
> Price and component parts pricing much more cost effective than Rotax.
> Sound !!!!!!
>
> Cons
>
> Must use fixed pitch prop (to date) which limits diameter you can run.
>
> Both engines are great and I think the application and also availability
> of service nearby would be the deciding factor for me
>
>
> Take off RPM 3050
>
>
> Gary Algate
> SMC, Exploration
> Office Phone: +61 8 8276 7655
>
>
> This e-mail is confidential and it is intended only for the addressees.
> Any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message by
> persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If
> you have received this e-mail in error, kindly notify us immediately by
> telephone or e-mail and delete the message from your system. The sender
> does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of
> this message which may arise as a result of the e-mail transmission.
>
>
> "Kirk Martenson" <aviateer@gmail.com>
> Sent by: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> 10/09/2008 10:30 PM
> Please respond to
> kitfox-list@matronics.com
>
> To
> kitfox-list@matronics.com
> cc
>
> Subject
> Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
>
> I know that there are a few people running the Jabiru in the Kitfox. Does
> anyone have a good comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912?
>
> I have a Classic IV with a sick 912. I may be replacing the whole engine
> and I am considering the Jabiru.
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 18
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 04:42:07 PM PST US
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
> From: gary.algate@sandvik.com
>
> This has started an interesting debate - once again
>
> When I first looked at the 912 and the 912S just about everybody with the
> 912S installation was having problems with cracking engine mounts and
> mufflers due to the high compression and resultant vicious start and stop
> sequence. I think the clutch was added to address this but not sure.
>
> On that basis in Canada there was a swing back to the 912.
>
> If you look at the Australian market where there is a strong service base
> for the Jabiru engines the percentage of ownership is the reverse of the
> numbers you are stating.
>
> Like I said - both great engines
>
> Gary
>
> Gary Algate
>
> Office Phone: +61 8 8276 7655
>
>
> This e-mail is confidential and it is intended only for the addressees.
> Any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message by
> persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If
> you have received this e-mail in error, kindly notify us immediately by
> telephone or e-mail and delete the message from your system. The sender
> does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of
> this message which may arise as a result of the e-mail transmission.
>
>
> "JetPilot" <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
> Sent by: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> 11/09/2008 12:10 AM
> Please respond to
> kitfox-list@matronics.com
>
> To
> kitfox-list@matronics.com
> cc
>
> Subject
> Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
>
>
> There is no comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912-S. It takes a
> heavy, 6 cylinder, 120 horsepower Jabiru to get the same performance as
> the 100 HP Rotax 912-S, at the expense of a much increased fuel burn. The
> Rotax 912-S is a much better, more reliable engine design. If you study
> performance of aircraft with these two engines, the Rotax 912-S wins hands
> down. The Rotax 912-S is more complicated than the Jabiru to install,
> but I am willing to do the work to end up with a better performing and
> more reliable plane.
>
> The statistic is that better than 80 % of all Light Sport aircraft
> manufactured today use the more expensive Rotax 912-S engine. There is a
> very good reason for this.
>
> Mike
>
> --------
> "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you
> could have !!!
>
> Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3585#203585
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 19
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 05:03:39 PM PST US
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
> From: gary.algate@sandvik.com
>
> Jeez Now I want a 914 - sounds like the perfect combo!
>
> Gary
>
> Gary Algate
> Jab2200 Classic 4
> Office Phone: +61 8 8276 7655
>
>
> This e-mail is confidential and it is intended only for the addressees.
> Any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message by
> persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If
> you have received this e-mail in error, kindly notify us immediately by
> telephone or e-mail and delete the message from your system. The sender
> does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of
> this message which may arise as a result of the e-mail transmission.
>
>
> "darinh" <gerns25@netscape.net>
> Sent by: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> 11/09/2008 08:38 AM
> Please respond to
> kitfox-list@matronics.com
>
> To
> kitfox-list@matronics.com
> cc
>
> Subject
> Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
>
>
> Here is some research I did when deciding which engine I would put on my
> Series 7 for those who are interested.
>
> Rotax
> 912s 141 lbs $19,373
> 914 166 lbs $31,413 (Thank goodness I didn't pay that much!)
>
> Jabiru
> 2200 132 lbs $13,900
> 3300 178 lbs $18,400
>
> Continental (TMX Experimental)
> 0-200 215lbs w/o exhaust $19,435
> IO-240 240 lbs w/o exhaust $20,135 (they also offer a FADEC version
> which is injected and computer controlled...very cool but $27,888.
>
> I ended up going with the 914 because I wanted the best performance
> throughout my flight envelope and this engine fit the bill the best. I
> really like the Jabiru but the fact that it can't swing nearly as big a
> prop would have limited my climb more than I had wanted. The Continentals
> are simply too heavy for me. I think for a IV the continental should not
> even be an option due to the weight. I know people have done it but I
> would stay away from it.
>
> I am glad that decision is over...that had to be the hardest one I made
> throughout the process!
>
> As for performance...I don't think I could touch my 914 with any other
> engine. I have seen as high as 1800 ft./min climb and have not hit Vx yet
> as the angle is uncomfortably steep. Cruise I get 118 to 120 TAS at 6000'
> @ 5000 rpm and 30" MAP (5000 and 31" is 75%). I suspect the speed will
> increase 5 mph or so when I get the stabilizer adjustment covers on. I
> think I could increase it another 5 mph if I got rid of my 850s and added
> all the strut fairings but I like the tires and I am sick of building so
> they will have to wait. The best part is that because of the turbo, above
> 12,500' (I fly from a 4500' field elevation) I am faster than my buddies
> 182 and I can still slow it down like a Kitfox should for landing....I
> love these planes!
>
> --------
> Darin Hawkes
> Series 7 (Phase 1 - Flight Testing)
> 914 Turbo
> Kaysville, Utah
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3706#203706
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 20
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 07:45:50 PM PST US
> From: Kitfoxkirk <aviateer@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
> Lowell,
>
> I think you guys will remember me. I have been off the list for about 2
> years now since my 912 UL Sh*t the bed.
>
> I have tried everything to try to fix the rough running engine (which
> causes
> the carbs to leak gas out of the vent tube while flying). I trailered the
> entire aircraft down to a maintenance facility in southern Wisconsin. It
> has
> been there for nearly a year. The engine is now at Leading Edge Air Foils
> in
> Lyons WI and they don't have a clue as to why it is running that way. Eric
> Tucker himself looked at this engine and cannot figure it out.
>
> They say it is beyond repair and they do not know why. Rotax will not
> stand
> behind the engine as they say it is out of warranty. It has less than 400
> hours on it.
>
> So, I was looking for an alternative to the 912 UL. I would like something
> American made. The continental was looking good, but it is too heavy. I
> was
> considering the Jabiru, but the foreign made thing scares me with the
> parts
> and service (been there done that with Rotax).
>
> If Lycoming or Continental made a small 130 lb engine installed, I could
> have brought it right over to Buldoc at Anoka here in MN.
>
> If I had the financial backing, I would like to make an engine right here
> in
> MN and sell it for a fair price and service it 100%. I would use "Six
> Sigma"
> and "Lean Manufacturing" Techniques . I would hold true to the "Toyota
> Way"
> (that was really invented by Henry Ford).
>
> I know there is a rotary engine being produced in the USA that is
> comparable
> to the Rotax in weight and horsepower, but I think it is a two stroke, and
> it has not been proven.
>
> Maybe I could invent a small 120 hp / 100 pound turbine for the
> Kitfox...Hmmmmm. Anyone want to start an engine manufacturing plant with
> me?
> The engine would have to be lubricated with vegetable oil, and run on
> water.
> OK, I'm tired... sorry for the rant.
> I will probably purchase another 912UL and hope that this one will
> work through to the full TBO.
>
> Kirk
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 9:10 AM, Lowell Fitt <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> Kirk,
>>
>> For all the Rotax guys, could you comment on the sickness?
>>
>> Lowell
>>
>> do not archive
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kirk Martenson" <aviateer@gmail.com>
>> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 5:51 AM
>> Subject: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>>
>>
>> I know that there are a few people running the Jabiru in the Kitfox. Does
>>> anyone have a good comparison between the Jabiru and the Rotax 912?
>>>
>>> I have a Classic IV with a sick 912. I may be replacing the whole engine
>>> and
>>> I am considering the Jabiru.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> ________________________________ Message 21
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 07:45:50 PM PST US
> From: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Lights
>
>
> Spec sheets are most interesting. The LEDs seem to have pretty good
> voltage
> and current flexibility but it is worth noting that they should not be run
> in reversed polarity. The junctions also get a lot warmer (well over
> 100C)
> than I would have expected. Light output is quite high and the spectrum
> width is still quite narrow. I think these diodes would make good NAV
> lights especially if used in multiples of the star or flood configuration.
>
> Thanks This has been most interesting.
>
> Noel
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rick
> Frederick
> Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 11:31 PM
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Lights
>
>
> This may have been mentioned before, or may not even apply...
>
> About 2 years ago I worked with a project that required high intensity
> lighting, for this application we used a philips device called 'luxeon
> emitters'.
> If anyone is interested here is the website:
> http://www.lumileds.com/products/line.cfm?lineId=18
>
> Rick, Kitfox IV / 912ul / 50%
> do not archive
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 7:44 PM
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Lights
>
>
>>
>> Rick,
>>
>> "A LED is a LED" is not entirely true unless you are not too interested
>> in
>
>> high light output. High intensity LEDS are a pretty new and exciting
>> development. There are LED products on the market now that weren't
>> available a year ago. Keep in mind that they are amperage sensitive so
>> output will vary with voltage shifts as we put the 12 or 14+ volts
>> through them depending on battery condition or charge voltage - hence the
>> requirement for a regulated power supply. It's not like buying a
>> couple
>
>> of fifty cent LEDs and putting a resister in the circuit to keep from
>> flrying them, unless all you need are low light output panel indicators.
>> The Lancair guy, I helped in the build, is in the forefront of LED
>> powered
>
>> fluorescent tube replacement technology here. It won't be long before
>> all
>
>> interior lighting is LED based and the incandescent bulbs, fluorescent
>> tubes and twisted bulbs will be in museum displays for our grandkids to
>> look at and laugh. These units won't be full of the LEDs available at
>> Radio Shack. Again, go to Kitplanes and read the three articles on this
>> subject ending with the October issue. The Modules recommended in this
>> article are available from Mouser for $9 to $11 a pop depending on color.
>> It is interesting that the current requirement varies with color and the
>> power supplies are slightly different to provide for that.
>>
>> Also keep in mind that these are collision avoidance items and light
>> output is an important consideration.
>>
>> Lowell
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "JetPilot" <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
>> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 11:29 AM
>> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Lights
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Harry means LED lights, and yes the LED lights made for airplanes are
>>> way
>
>>> more expensive than they need to be. I will also be looking for a
>>> better
>
>>> cheaper source for the LED lights for my Kitfox. They dont have to be
>>> aircraft LED's, an LED is an LED and will last for 50,000 hours or more
>>> while consuming only 10 % of the power of a traditional light... As
>>> long as I can mount the LED's to the airplane in a nice way I will be
>>> happy.
>>>
>>>
>>> Rick,
>>>
>>> What is Code 3 ???
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>>> --------
>>> "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you
>>> could have !!!
>>>
>>> Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>
>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3425#203425
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 22
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 07:53:32 PM PST US
> From: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Lights
>
>
> Gee Michel... You won't know if you're coming or going :-)
>
> Noel
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michel
> Verheughe
> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 4:07 AM
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Lights
>
>> From: Noel Loveys [noelloveys@yahoo.ca]
>> I also have red and green LEDs
>> in my lamp posts at the end of the driveway ( red right return same as
>> navigation )
>
> Ah, but then you use the IALA system B, my friend! If I ever drive to your
> home, I would be confused, accustomed to the European system A that has
> red
> on red and green on green when sailing TOWARD a harbour! :-)
>
> Cheers,
> Michel Verheughe
> Norway
> Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200 .... flying as PAX
> Do not archive
>
>
> <pre><b><font size=2 color="#000000" face="courier new,courier">
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://www.matronics.c
> om/Navigator?Kitfox-List</a>
> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com</a>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contri
> bution</a>
>
> </b></font></pre>
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 23
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 07:58:42 PM PST US
> From: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Lights
>
> Nice looking units !
>
>
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Catz631@aol.com
> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 9:48 AM
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Lights
>
>
> Just sold my Whelen wingtip strobes on Ebay for almost $400. That really
> reduced the price of my Aveoflash strobe/running light led units that I
> installed on my aircraft and bought from Spruce ($600 the pair). These
> self
> contained units fastened right to the wingtips with a minimum of effort
> and
> I am in business.All sealed in a lump of plastic with no power pack.It
> couldn't be more simple! Power use is 750 ma for the two. They are bright
> !
> (even with the leads attached to a simple 9 volt battery) One of my better
> purchases(next to Lowells trim system--but not that good!)
>
> Dick Maddux
>
> Fox 4-1200
>
> Pensacola,fl
>
>
> _____
>
> Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new
> <http://www.stylelist.com/trends?ncid=aolsty00050000000014> fashion blog,
> plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com.
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 24
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 08:03:47 PM PST US
> From: Michael Gibbs <MichaelGibbs@cox.net>
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Jabiru
>
>
> Kirk sez:
>
>>Anyone want to start an engine manufacturing plant with me? The
>>engine would have to be lubricated with vegetable oil, and run on
>>water...
>
> No, but I'll be first in line to buy one from you when you get it
> into production!
>
> Mike G.
> N728KF, Kitfox IV-1200 Speedster
> Phoenix, AZ
>
> Do not archive
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 25
> ____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 09:12:08 PM PST US
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
> From: "JetPilot" <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
>
>
> aviateer wrote:
>>
>> They say it is beyond repair and they do not know why. Rotax will not
> stand
> behind the engine as they say it is out of warranty. It has less than 400
> hours
> on it.
>>
>>
>
>
> Kirk,
>
> That really sucks. There must be someone somewhere that can figure this
> out...
> Keep trying, someone will probably hit on it sooner or later. I would
> suggest
> you call Lockwood Aviation technical support line, and ask for Kerry, he
> is
> their most experienced mechanic. Its a long shot, but if I was in your
> situation,
> I would be trying anything and everything ( As long as it did not cost to
> much money [Wink] ). The call is free..
>
> Mike
>
> --------
> "NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you
> could
> have !!!
>
> Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3751#203751
>
>
>
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: Jabiru (engine choices) |
Lowell -
Please don't take this the wrong way, but your engine failed as well. Did you
ever determine the cause?
I realize this might come across as a negative response, but not my intent
at all. However could it be, that your maintenance routine should have been
more comprehensive?
I only say this because you are stating how minimal your maintenance was,
up to the point where it kissed the ground.
Regards,
Jeff
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3872#203872
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 |
|
I, too, went the LED route when I figured out how many amps the Whelen
nav lights stole from the anemic 22 amps available on the Rotax 912S. I
built my own LED 'bulbs' to replace the incandescents bulbs supplied
with the Whelen. One of my criteria was not to modify the Whelen
fixture so that it could revert to its original configuration at any
time. The results are shown (about halfway down) my web page at
http://www.itsys3.com/kitfox/discover.shtml.
Bill Hammond
Parker, CO
Series 6, 912ULS, 550 flight hours
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3830#203830
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
Nice web site, Bill. Thanks for sharing it.
Deke Morisse
Mikado Michigan
S5/Subaru/CAP 397+ TT
"The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress."
- Joseph Joubert
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Hammond" <kitfox@itsys3.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 4:19 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Lights
>
> I, too, went the LED route when I figured out how many amps the Whelen
> nav lights stole from the anemic 22 amps available on the Rotax 912S. I
> built my own LED 'bulbs' to replace the incandescents bulbs supplied
> with the Whelen. One of my criteria was not to modify the Whelen
> fixture so that it could revert to its original configuration at any
> time. The results are shown (about halfway down) my web page at
> http://www.itsys3.com/kitfox/discover.shtml.
>
> Bill Hammond
> Parker, CO
> Series 6, 912ULS, 550 flight hours
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3830#203830
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: Jabiru (engine choices) |
I think what Lowell is saying is that the Rotax doesn't really require any more
(or at least any more time consuming) maintenance than any other engine. As
I recall, Lowell had a 0 oil pressure indication so he chose to set it down as
a precaution. It is very possible that he had a sensor go bad and that the engine
was perfectly fine. It did stay running to the ground.
Nobody, regardless of the maintenance performed, can guarantee that an engine will
not quit at any time. The fact is engines quit and have problems regardless
of brand or type and there are pros and cons to all of them. I really like
the IO-240 but it is too heavy in my opinion for the Kitfox. Remember, the moment
arm of the pilot seat and passenger is relatively short and does not make
much a difference in the CG so even if you are a lightweight, that heavy engine
on the nose will require you to mount at least your battery in the tail.
The idea of a 10 lb battery in the tail breaking loose in what would be a survivable
emergency landing can to numbers to someone's head. I don't remember where
I read it but an NTSB inspector said that he had investigated many accidents
that should have been survivable if it weren't for heavy or sharp objects
in the baggage compartment. The most memorable incident to him was a pilot who
had be impaled by a fishing rod after an emergency landing and abrupt stop.
Again, the IO-240 is a great engine and many a Kitfox are flying with them and
they perform great...I just don't like batteries in the tail. Just my opinion.
--------
Darin Hawkes
Series 7 (Phase 1 - Flight Testing)
914 Turbo
Kaysville, Utah
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3881#203881
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Jabiru (engine choices) |
Again, the IO-240 is a great engine and many a Kitfox are flying with them
and they perform great...I just don't like batteries in the tail. Just my
opinion.
You may be in luck, Lycoming has introduced a new IO-233 for the LSA market,
designed to compete against the Rotax and Continental.
http://www.lycoming.com/
Lloyd C
UP Mi
Mod 5 912ul IVO IFA
Do not Archive
Checked by AVG.
7:03 AM
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 |
|
Speaking of older technology Jabirus, I for one am converting at
least a part of that old tech to new tech, in that I'm currently
waiting for the big brown truck to arrive with my new Electroair
( www.electroair.net ) ignition system. You won't see the exact thing
that I'm having made on their website, but close. I'm having them
make a crankshaft trigger mechanism for my just rebuilt Jab 2200. I
will no longer have distributors, caps and rotors, but direct fire
right from the coils. I know there are other engines out there with a
similar system, but this'll be the first Jabiru to my knowledge with
this system. They normally provide a housing that replaces one of the
mags on an engine, and this "timing housing" sends info to a
controller, which sends info to the coils. I opted to do away
completely with the Jabiru distributors, and let the crank trigger be
my sole means of timing information. I will have to provide my own
brackets for the pickup units, which must be precisely 180 apart,
but that should be no sweat.
One of the faults I have with Jabiru....and there ARE a couple....is
the ignition system with its (on my engine alone it seems) leaky dist
shafts (grooves worn in the shafts from the seals), sloppy rotors
after a couple hundred hours, and generally technology that is behind
the times. This system will bring the ignition part of the engine
into the current century, and the rest of it will have to suffer
along as best it can.
Lynn Matteson
Kitfox IV Speedster
Jabiru 2200, 562 hrs...engine assembled and back in the plane;
waiting for new ignition system
Status: "Condition grounded, but determined to try." (Pink
Floyd..."Learning to Fly")
On Sep 11, 2008, at 1:18 PM, JetPilot wrote:
>
> This could be the new light alternative we need to older technology
> Rotax and Jabiru engines.
> Mike
>
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 |
|
Air cooled and direct drive? Blasphemy, I say!! Where's a good
moderator when you really need one? (besides the retired ones that is)
I wish that when I had my engine apart, that I would have weighed all
the components, but I forgot to, while having so much fun working on it.
Lynn Matteson
Kitfox IV Speedster
Jabiru 2200, 562 hrs...engine assembled and back in the plane;
waiting for new ignition system
Status: "Condition grounded, but determined to try." (Pink
Floyd..."Learning to Fly")
do not archive
On Sep 11, 2008, at 1:56 PM, fox5flyer wrote:
> Hey, Duano! Good to hear that you're still playing with (my old)
> your toy and still hanging out here.
> Speaking of FADEC, here's a 95hp engine that is made in Belgium
> with 4 stroke power that looks very promising for a model IV. 159
> lbs dry weight with all accessories including exhaust. Air cooled
> and direct drive.
> Deke Morisse
> Mikado Michigan
> S5/Subaru/CAP 397+ TT
> "The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but
> progress."
> - Joseph Joubert
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Rueb, Duane
> To: 'kitfox-list@matronics.com'
> Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 10:40 AM
> Subject: RE: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
>
> Good point on I of the IO. The FADEC is kind of expensive and
> takes the responsibility of mixture control from the pilot and
> gives it to the FADEC computer. For $7 grand I can do my own
> mixture. In fact I would rather do it myself.
>
> I love the IO-240; especially now with the 2lb spring in the fuel
> distributor and the fuel pressures properly adjusted, and the bleed
> hole drilled in the throttle plate, in other words with the AD mods
> done, (which would be done on a new one. ) I believe that the
> IO-240 is the best engine available at the 125hp level, a very nice
> level for a 5 series or later K-fox. Put a nice wood prop similar
> to a Clark Lydek Performance quasi constant speed in front and
> enjoy a wonderful flying experience, where you can cruise your Fox
> at 125mph and burn a little over 6 gal./hr or burn 4 to 5 gal or
> less while just putting around, looking at the wonderful earth
> below. I must say, it is a wonderful thing to know that what is up
> front will keep blowing the air needed to keep the pilot cool.
>
>
> Duane Rueb
>
> N24ZM/IO-240B4B
>
> From: owner-kitfox-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-
> list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of W Duke
> Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 4:30 AM
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
>
>
> Not to nitpick but all IO-240s are fuel injected. That is what the
> I in IO is for. So really the extra 7 grand is just for the
> FADEC. I do not have the FADEC.
>
> Maxwell Duke
> S6/TD/IO240
> Dublin, GA
>
> --- On Wed, 9/10/08, fox5flyer <fox5flyer@idealwifi.net> wrote:
>
> From: fox5flyer <fox5flyer@idealwifi.net>
> Subject: Re: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
> To: kitfox-list@matronics.com
> Date: Wednesday, September 10, 2008, 7:19 PM
>
> Darin.Dekedo not archive ----- Original Message ----- From:
> "darinh" To: Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 6:58 PMSubject:
> "darinh"> > Here is some research I did when deciding which engine
> I would put on my > Series 7 for those who are interested.> >
> Rotax> 912s 141 lbs $19,373> 914 166 lbs $31,413 (Thank
> goodness I didn't pay that much!)> > Jabiru> 2200 132 lbs
> $13,900> 3300 178 lbs $18,400> > Continental (TMX Experimental)>
> 0-200 215lbs w/o exhaust $19,435> IO-240 240 lbs w/o exhaust
> $20,135 (they also offer a FADEC version > which is injected and
> computer controlled...very cool but $27,888.> > I ended up going
> with the 914 because I wanted the best performance > throughout my
> flight envelope and this engine fit the bill the best. I > really
> like the Jabiru but the fact that it can't swing nearly as biga >
> prop would have limited my climb more than I had wanted. The
> Continentals > are simply too heavy for me. I think for a IV the
> continental should not > even be an option due to the weight. I
> know people have done it but I > would stay away from it.> > I am
> glad that decision is over...that had to be the hardest one I made
> > throughout the process!> > As for performance...I don't think I
> could touch my 914 with any other > engine. I have seen as high as
> 1800 ft./min climb and have not hit Vx yet > as the angle is
> uncomfortably steep. Cruise I get 118 to 120 TAS at6000' > @ 5000
> rpm and 30" MAP (5000 and 31" is 75%). I suspect thespeed will >
> increase 5 mph or so when I get the stabilizer adjustment covers
> on. I > think I could increase it another 5 mph if I got rid of my
> 850s and added > all the strut fairings but I like the tires and I
> am sick of building so > they will have to wait. The best part is
> that because of the turbo, above > 12,500' (I fly from a 4500'
> field elevation) I am faster than mybuddies > 182 and I can still
> slow it down like a Kitfox should for landing....I > love these
> planes!> > --------> Darin Hawkes> Series 7 (Phase 1 - Flight
> Testing)> 914 Turbo> Kaysville, Utah> > > > > Read this topic
> online here:> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?
> p 3706#203706> > > > > > > > > >
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-Listhttp://
> forums.matronics.comhttp://www.matronics.com/contribution
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List">http://
> www.matronhref="http://forums.matronics.com">http://
> forums.matronics.comhref="http://www.matronics.com/
> contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c_-
> ============================================================ _-
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List_-
> ============================================================ _-
> forums.matronics.com_-
> ============================================================ _-
> contribution_-
> ===========================================================
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: Jabiru (engine choices) |
I haven't exactly been leading the parade of happy Jabiru owners here
lately, but just to even the scales a bit, I gotta say that my Jabiru
came with fiberglas cooling ducts that required little more than some
trimming to make them fit. These ducts are held on with springs and a
couple of rocker cover bolts as standard. I attached mine a bit
differently, using two springs and no messing with the rocker cover
bolts. I had no appreciable cooling issues. I only recently decide to
fine tune the head temperatures, and installing a 4 sq. in. metal
plate inside the duct directed the air differently and did the trick.
The six-cylinder, I understand is another animal when it comes to
cooling, and I can't speak to that.
Granted, the six-cylinder Jabiru that my friend will use in his now-
being-built Waiex is like you alluded...a nightmare of sheet metal
and nutplates, and I don't envy him his future in cooling issues.
Lynn Matteson
Kitfox IV Speedster
Jabiru 2200, 562 hrs...engine assembled and back in the plane;
waiting for new ignition system
Status: "Condition grounded, but determined to try." (Pink
Floyd..."Learning to Fly")
On Sep 11, 2008, at 2:40 PM, Lowell Fitt wrote:
> <lcfitt@sbcglobal.net>
>
> Mike,
> (snip)
> I guess it all boils down to perceived preferences and what each
> person regards as important. There are lots of posts that refer to
> the simplicity of the Jabiru with no liquid cooling. Then comes
> the posts talking about the importance of proper baffeling after
> posts referring to cooling issues. I find that baffeling. I
> installed the baffeling on the Lancair IV I helped with and believe
> me it is much easier to install a radiator and a few hoses than all
> that sheet metal with the numerous nutplates in preparation for
> those all too frequent annual inspections. But, again, to each his
> own, I guess.
>
> Lowell
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "JetPilot" <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
> To: <kitfox-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 10:18 AM
> Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru
>
>
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: | Re: Jabiru (engine choices) |
Jeff, No offense taken. The failure was not Rotax related, but possibly
maintenance related. Something got into the lube system It clogged the oil
lines. The FAA / NTSB tore down the engine. I have reviewed my oil change
routine and don't understand how it happened. It may have been part of the
cap off of one of the oil bottles. Again, given the routing developed over
18 oil changes, I don't have any idea how it could have gotten through the
filler neck and into the oil tank.
With regard to difficult, If I did somehow introduce part of an oil cap into
the oil tank, that possibility is certainly not a risk peculiar to Rotax
engines. A word of caution here. Those little rings that secure the caps
as a safety feature, can disappear. I have talked to some who open the
bottle, remove the cap, then cut off the ring, then place the ring and cap
on a towel and both are counted after the oil change. I have always
recapped the bottles, but cannot say for sure that the ring was always there
as well.
Lowell
----- Original Message -----
From: "n85ae" <n85ae@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 1:08 PM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Re: Jabiru (engine choices)
>
> Lowell -
>
> Please don't take this the wrong way, but your engine failed as well. Did
> you
> ever determine the cause?
>
> I realize this might come across as a negative response, but not my intent
> at all. However could it be, that your maintenance routine should have
> been
> more comprehensive?
>
> I only say this because you are stating how minimal your maintenance was,
> up to the point where it kissed the ground.
>
> Regards,
> Jeff
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3872#203872
>
>
>
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: | E-mail-A-Friend: Small plane crashes after short flight |
Comment:
FYI
Marco Menezes N99KX
Model 2 582-90 C-Box
---
Story:
Small plane crashes after short flight
Stanley Tews experimental Kit Fox airplane had only climbed about 100 feet Friday
when the engine started sputtering.
When the engine quit, Tew found himself in a battle with airspeed and altitude
above the Deatsville countryside. After taking off from a friends pasture around
5:30 Friday afternoon, the 62-year-old pilots pleasure flight ended in a stand
of pine trees a short distance away.
For more of this story, click on or type the URL below:
http://thewetumpkaherald.com/articles/2008/09/11/news/news02.txt
--------------------------------------------------------------------
This e-mail contains information for the purpose of tracking abuse.
If you believe this email is offensive or may be considered spam,
please visit the website http://abuse.townnews.com and create an
incident report. From this site you can also block messages like
this from sending to your email address. Please retain this Mail-ID
[78d598cbcfbecfade084dfe6cf45c3b8], it's needed to view information
associated with this message. Click the link below to view the incident.
http://abuse.townnews.com/?MailID=78d598cbcfbecfade084dfe6cf45c3b8
Read the acceptable use policy: http://support.townnews.com/docs/aup
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Parting out Model 2 |
Seems like info on your crash is making its rounds on the
web...............
http://thewetumpkaherald.com/articles/2008/09/11/news/news02.txt
----- Original Message -----
From: Stan Tew
To: Kitfox-List Digest Server
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 8:34 AM
Subject: Kitfox-List: Parting out Model 2
After flying N8188F for almost 11 years I am parting it out due to
landing in trees Friday 9/5/08. I have discovered the engine failure was
due to debris in the fuel inlet port of the front carburetor starving
the float bowl of fuel. The rear cylinder of the 582 blue head was
running but couldn't pull the dead cylinder too.
I have recovered the aircraft from the trees and have it back in my
hangar. Many parts are serviceable as is like the engine and gearbox.
some need minor repair like the horizontal stabalizer. Others will
require major repair.
If you are interested in obtaining parts please contact me.
Stan Tew
8853 Oak Meadow Ct
Montgomery AL 36116
(334) 272-0012 home
(334) 313-7934 cell
stan_tew@yahoo.com
STAN 2
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
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 |
|
n981ms(at)yahoo.com wrote:
> Not to nitpick but all IO-240s are fuel injected. That is what the I in IO is
for. So really the extra 7 grand is just for the FADEC. I do not have the
FADEC.
> ---
Yes, all IO engines are fuel injected. I guess my comment in the previous post
should have read "not only fuel injected but also FADEC controlled". I figure
most of us who have the capacity to build an aircraft know the difference between
O, IO, TSIO and soforth. Thanks for the clarification.
--------
Darin Hawkes
Series 7 (Phase 1 - Flight Testing)
914 Turbo
Kaysville, Utah
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3918#203918
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 |
|
if (typeof YAHOO == "undefined") {
var YAHOO = {};
}
YAHOO.Shortcuts = YAHOO.Shortcuts || {};
YAHOO.Shortcuts.hasSensitiveText = false;
YAHOO.Shortcuts.sensitivityType = [];
YAHOO.Shortcuts.doUlt = false;
YAHOO.Shortcuts.location = "us";
YAHOO.Shortcuts.document_id = 0;
YAHOO.Shortcuts.document_type = "";
YAHOO.Shortcuts.document_title = "tricycle KF 2";
YAHOO.Shortcuts.document_publish_date = "";
YAHOO.Shortcuts.document_author = "noelro10@yahoo.com";
YAHOO.Shortcuts.document_url = "";
YAHOO.Shortcuts.document_tags = "";
YAHOO.Shortcuts.document_language = "english";
YAHOO.Shortcuts.annotationSet = {
};
Work good, ground-behaviour, like ski ranger
-
I used many ideas,steering front wheel-from Mr-Dave of canada, Grove an
d front plate,-from Mr steve of Utah and under bracers from RV-6, And mi
own ideas.=0A=0A=0A
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 |
|
Bill,
Any more photos of how you built them?
--------
Jorge Fernandez
Supersport
Fuselage/Forward Controls
http://websites.expercraft.com/jlfernan/
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 3925#203925
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: RE: Kitfox-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 09/10/08 |
At 10:49 AM 9/11/2008, you wrote:
>Sonny Logan who built No. 36 two decades ago tells me no
>trim needed, just use flaperons. I'm thinking a simple bungee pulling elev.
>Tube either way with a small rope and a sailboat clam cleat is the simplest.
>Any input appreciated.
I like my manual trim. It's easy and it works. Lowell's done
testing and found the elevator trim tab to offer much less drag than
trimming with the flaperons. I like it because it has a lot more
range than the flaperons and works when you use the flaperons as
flaps. (Obviously if you use the flaperons as flaps, you can't use
them for trim.)
Guy Buchanan
San Diego, CA
K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar.
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! --
|