Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:43 AM - stuff for sale (Ted Cowan)
2. 08:02 AM - Re: HKS on a FS11 (John Jung)
3. 08:38 AM - Re: Re: HKS on a FS11 (robert bean)
4. 09:44 AM - Re: Kolb-List Digest: 12 Msgs - 12/29/05 (b young)
5. 10:52 AM - Re: Re: Kolb-List Digest: 12 Msgs - 12/29/05 (Robert Laird)
6. 02:19 PM - 2 Stroke VS 4 Stroke (Michael Bigelow)
7. 02:44 PM - Re: 2 Stroke VS 4 Stroke (Beauford)
8. 05:04 PM - HKS on a FS11 (Edward Steuber)
9. 05:29 PM - Re: Re: Tie downs, gust locks (Robert Noyer)
10. 05:41 PM - EIS (bryan green)
11. 06:08 PM - Re: 2 Stroke VS 4 Stroke (lucien stavenhagen)
12. 06:35 PM - Re: 2 Stroke VS 4 Stroke (Ed Chmielewski)
13. 07:49 PM - Re: 2 Stroke VS 4 Stroke (WillUribe@aol.com)
14. 08:26 PM - Re: Re: HKS on a FS11 (WillUribe@aol.com)
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Ted Cowan <trc1917@direcway.com>
Hope everyone had a great Christmas and are ready to have a tremendous New
Year. Gotta ring the bell for John Hauck's Brother, Jim. He is apparently
getting out of the aircraft industry and wants to give us a deal. Go see
the For Sale page of our web site at: www.homestead.com/southernflyers
Click on the 'for sale' section and check it out. Yes, all of that for four
grand. He will be having a lot of other stuff also. Great guy. I am sure
you will get a deal. Might want to check out the rest of the web site also.
I am the web master and I try my best. You all take care out there. If you
are building a Kolb and need this stuff, you gotta real bargain listed.
Happy Holidays!! Ted Cowan, Alabama
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | RE: HKS on a FS11 |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: John Jung <jrjungjr@yahoo.com>
Will and Group,
Will, too bad you only read some on the posts. You missed my point. I
started this thread and the reason that I am considering the HKS is not
because of reliability. My 503 has been fantastically reliable for 200
hours. It is to increase the range and cruise speed. And, I know that
because of your long trip with a 503, you could still say "Who needs
more range?". But it is something that I would like to have.
John Jung
Firestar II N6163J
Surprise, AZ
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RE: HKS on a FS11 |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: robert bean <slyck@frontiernet.net>
John, I think you should go for it, if for no other reason than that
we have no Kolb experience with one (at least on the list).
There have been some Verners.
Everyone likes to save money but seeing how many builders
shell out the long $$$ for the 912 I don't figure why anyone would
rule out an engine at roughly half that price.
The advantage over an automotive conversion is the time and
labor saved, as several of us can attest.
-BB do not archive
On 30, Dec 2005, at 11:01 AM, John Jung wrote:
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: John Jung <jrjungjr@yahoo.com>
>
> Will and Group,
>
> Will, too bad you only read some on the posts. You missed my point. I
> started this thread and the reason that I am considering the HKS is not
> because of reliability. My 503 has been fantastically reliable for 200
> hours. It is to increase the range and cruise speed. And, I know that
> because of your long trip with a 503, you could still say "Who needs
> more range?". But it is something that I would like to have.
>
> John Jung
> Firestar II N6163J
> Surprise, AZ
>
>
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Kolb-List Digest: 12 Msgs - 12/29/05 |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "b young" <by0ung@brigham.net>
Dave I purchased my NAVMAN from Boaters world also but I told another guy
about NAVMAN and he got one cheaper than I did but there worth every nickle
you
pay for it no matter what it is You can Go to the navman Website @
(NAVMAN.com) click on Products,Marine,fuel solutions and from there you can
locate
a
distributor and there price
---------------------------------
i bought the prinston fuel probe.. and it feeds into one of the aux. inputs
to the EIS. it is set up to read in 1/10 of gallons. and is programable
to be accurate at empty, 1/4, 1/2, 3/4, full. the eis will even flash the
master warning light when the fuel level reaches a programable limit.
boyd
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Kolb-List Digest: 12 Msgs - 12/29/05 |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Robert Laird <rlaird@cavediver.com>
On 12/30/05, b young <by0ung@brigham.net> wrote:
> i bought the prinston fuel probe.. and it feeds into one of the aux. inputs
> to the EIS. it is set up to read in 1/10 of gallons. and is programable
> to be accurate at empty, 1/4, 1/2, 3/4, full. the eis will even flash the
> master warning light when the fuel level reaches a programable limit.
Boyd --
Which EIS is that? And where did you get the "prinston" fuel probe?
-- Robert
do not archive
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: | 2 Stroke VS 4 Stroke |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Michael Bigelow" <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
" My 2 stroke has worked fine all these years... I will stick with the
reliable 2 stroke Rotax 503 "
That is a pretty dangerous attitude to have. Just because some have beat
the odds so far does not mean that the 2 stroke is a realiable engine, it
just means that you have have had the skill and a certain amount of luck to
keep your 2 stroke running. I flew one of the first weight shit
Quicksilvers with a 10 HP Chrysler 2 stroke engine on it, which never gave
me a problem... That being said, I never forgot what I had, an engine with a
horrible record of quitting and I always respected it as such. 2 Strokes
have improved vastly since then, but they are still 2 stroke engines and
they dont even compare to 4 strokes reliability wise... Never forget it.
Dirt Bikes, boats, even lawn equpment is being made with more expensive 4
stroke engines, because they are simply better. I ride cross country on my
dirt bike, and I would not even consider going cross country on a 2 stroke
bike. I am even less willing to fly over trees, terrain, etc with a 2
stroke engine in my ultralight. The 4 stroke engines are expensive, but
they are well worth the extra money. If you look at the increased fuel and
oil usage, the continual maintenance and rebuilds, if you fly a lot, the 4
stroke eventaully pays for itself over time. For that moment when the 2
stroke quits unexpectedly, the 4 stroke pays for itself instantly. I know
that 16,000 for a 912-s or 8,000 for the HKS is a lot of money, but if this
is the hobby you enjoy and you fly alot, it is worth doing whatever it takes
to get the best engine you can. I have worked more extra days than I can
shake a stick at to afford my 912, but it is well worth it. I love to fly,
and there was a time I could not possibly afford a 4 storke engine, and in
that case I flew 2 strokes rather than walk (that was a Joke :) I am
willing to take risks in pursuit of what I love to do, but I never never
forgot the fact that my 2 stroke was an engine that would quit at any
moment. I think we should always honest with ourselves and others about 2
strokes, tell newcomers that they are not reliable, that they are much more
likely to quit than a 4 storke, and let each person make an intelligent
choice based on the type of flying they do. We are doing a great disservice
to everyone by giving others a false sense of security by saying " 2 strokes
are reliable, I have never had a problem with mine". Just because some
have beat the odds does not change the fact that 2 stroke engines are
substandard in realiability, and that one day they will quit at the worst
possible time.
Michael A. Bigelow
Do Not Archive
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 2 Stroke VS 4 Stroke |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Beauford" <beauford@tampabay.rr.com>
Right on, Mike...
Although, due to its' impeccable service history, I'd fly my 447 into the
teeth of hell itself... or, if pressed, at least to the city limits of
Sebring....
Beauford, the Aluminum Butcher of Brandon
FF #076
Do Not Archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Bigelow" <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: 2 Stroke VS 4 Stroke
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Michael Bigelow"
<orcabonita@hotmail.com>
>
> " My 2 stroke has worked fine all these years... I will stick with the
> reliable 2 stroke Rotax 503 "
>
> That is a pretty dangerous attitude to have. Just because some have beat
> the odds so far does not mean that the 2 stroke is a realiable engine, it
> just means that you have have had the skill and a certain amount of luck
to
> keep your 2 stroke running. I flew one of the first weight shit
> Quicksilvers with a 10 HP Chrysler 2 stroke engine on it, which never gave
> me a problem... That being said, I never forgot what I had, an engine with
a
> horrible record of quitting and I always respected it as such. 2 Strokes
> have improved vastly since then, but they are still 2 stroke engines and
> they dont even compare to 4 strokes reliability wise... Never forget it.
>
> Dirt Bikes, boats, even lawn equpment is being made with more expensive 4
> stroke engines, because they are simply better. I ride cross country on
my
> dirt bike, and I would not even consider going cross country on a 2 stroke
> bike. I am even less willing to fly over trees, terrain, etc with a 2
> stroke engine in my ultralight. The 4 stroke engines are expensive, but
> they are well worth the extra money. If you look at the increased fuel
and
> oil usage, the continual maintenance and rebuilds, if you fly a lot, the 4
> stroke eventaully pays for itself over time. For that moment when the 2
> stroke quits unexpectedly, the 4 stroke pays for itself instantly. I know
> that 16,000 for a 912-s or 8,000 for the HKS is a lot of money, but if
this
> is the hobby you enjoy and you fly alot, it is worth doing whatever it
takes
> to get the best engine you can. I have worked more extra days than I can
> shake a stick at to afford my 912, but it is well worth it. I love to
fly,
> and there was a time I could not possibly afford a 4 storke engine, and
in
> that case I flew 2 strokes rather than walk (that was a Joke :) I am
> willing to take risks in pursuit of what I love to do, but I never never
> forgot the fact that my 2 stroke was an engine that would quit at any
> moment. I think we should always honest with ourselves and others about 2
> strokes, tell newcomers that they are not reliable, that they are much
more
> likely to quit than a 4 storke, and let each person make an intelligent
> choice based on the type of flying they do. We are doing a great
disservice
> to everyone by giving others a false sense of security by saying " 2
strokes
> are reliable, I have never had a problem with mine". Just because some
> have beat the odds does not change the fact that 2 stroke engines are
> substandard in realiability, and that one day they will quit at the worst
> possible time.
>
> Michael A. Bigelow
>
> Do Not Archive
>
>
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Edward Steuber" <esteuber@rochester.rr.com>
The main reason I did not like the speed of the Ultrastar was because it did
not go as slow as I was used to on the previous stock Ultrastar I owned before
this one. I really liked the 60 mph speed . Pulling the throttle back did
slow the latest one down , but then the engine was not happy at 4800...something
to do with the mid-range of the carburetor that would not be adjusted. I also
feel the engine should be run at 5400 for keeping the engine "healthy".....
2 strokes like higher RPM s. The higher speed on these light airframes could
be a disaster waiting to happen....want to find out ? No Thanks !
Besides , if you want to go fast , buy a standard category airplane ....plenty
of them on the market cause so many pilots are either giving up or going
to ultralights cause of operating costs...I have a Traveler (early Cheetah) that
got 3 hours on it last year and 2 Cassutt Racers that need to be completed
but have been neglected cause I'm having too much fun with the UL's. Got a taildragger
CGS Hawk that is almost ready for covering, too ! Guess which project
is getting my attention first ?
The Navman can be bought for a little under $130 if you do a search using
Navman fuel ....Haven't used mine yet but Ellery in Maine loves his...the thing
I like about it is I can add another tank for cross countrys and just select
the higher capacity without adding sensors to the extra tank...the thing I don't
like is that you won't know if you have a leak in the system (forward of
the transducer) until the engine quits from fuel starvation.......but if you have
a tank that is impossible to gauge , then this may be the answer...
Ed in Western NY
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: Tie downs, gust locks |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: Robert Noyer <a58r@verizon.net>
Although I can't hold a candle to Ray's tale of The Tree-Toppin' Tin
Lizzie, I have another True Tie-down Tale.
Friend bought a Sw 2-32 sailplane, sight unseen, but with "only
little damage on roll-out." He was in N. VA, plane in Plymouth MA.
This should have given the buyer a clue...Plymouth, as in ROCK! Ok,
he arrives about dusk and is shown to an unlit hangar. Wings off,
canvas over nose and canopy. Hand shake, the two go out for drinks
and dinner. And drinks, repeat as necessary. Early AM the wounded
bird is lashed down, fore and aft, Silverado ready to make turns for
55 mph.
Coupla days later The Grey Baron is consulted on making the passel of
parts airworthy. The corpse was laid out in an unheated 3-car garage.
It was December. COLD.
After some 3 hrs I had surveyed this mess: nose cone needed extensive
FG work, canopy needed trashing, rt. wing needed new LE 3/4 way to
tip, and best of all the rt. spar was buckeled. I think it had hit
Plymouth Rock on the off-field roll-out.
Young owner was a nice kid, no money. I offered to trade him my work
for some of his. He had a house washing biz. I needed a 2 car port
enclosed.
By May I got an IA to sign my Mech rating work off. House looked
better, Garage looked good.
Sailplane taken to soaring field some 50 mi away, and tied down using
1/4 a/c cables tied to three half oil drums filled with concrete and
sunk level. Before I could get ride, a spring T'storm waltzed
through the field, broke one wing tie down cable, rolled the plane,
pulled the other drum outa the sod, flopped around some more, and the
loose weighted drum falls back down, Right Though The Repaired Wing.
Ins. paid $8000. Guess who didn't get a COLD dollar?
And there was a whole 29 min logged after repair.
Bob N.
do not archive
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 |
|
--> Kolb-List message posted by: bryan green <lgreen1@sc.rr.com>
I got mine from Grand Rapids Technology Robert the link is
http://www.grtavionics.com/
Bryan Green Elgin SC
Do not archive
Robert Laird wrote:
>--> Kolb-List message posted by: Robert Laird <rlaird@cavediver.com>
>
>On 12/30/05, b young <by0ung@brigham.net> wrote:
>
>
>>i bought the prinston fuel probe.. and it feeds into one of the aux. inputs
>>to the EIS. it is set up to read in 1/10 of gallons. and is programable
>>to be accurate at empty, 1/4, 1/2, 3/4, full. the eis will even flash the
>>master warning light when the fuel level reaches a programable limit.
>>
>>
>
>Boyd --
>
>Which EIS is that? And where did you get the "prinston" fuel probe?
>
> -- Robert
>
>do not archive
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: | 2 Stroke VS 4 Stroke |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "lucien stavenhagen" <lstavenhagen@hotmail.com>
> I think we should always honest with ourselves and others about 2
>strokes, tell newcomers that they are not reliable, that they are much more
>likely to quit than a 4 storke, and let each person make an intelligent
>choice based on the type of flying they do. We are doing a great
>disservice
>to everyone by giving others a false sense of security by saying " 2
>strokes
>are reliable, I have never had a problem with mine". Just because some
>have beat the odds does not change the fact that 2 stroke engines are
>substandard in realiability, and that one day they will quit at the worst
>possible time.
Ok can't let this one go.
A sense of responsibility to newcomers and others is admirable, but it
ceases to be so when it involves spreading misinformation like this.
To wit, "Substandard in reliablity", "beat the odds" and "not reliable" are
simply false and uninformed statements to make about our modern 2-strokes,
particularly the Rotax motors. This has been confirmed by decades of field
experience with the Rotaxen, particularly the 447 and 503.
In fact, if there's anything we can say for certain about the reliability of
the 2-stroke, it is that the strengths and weaknesses of them are very well
known and confirmed by field experience.
Knowledge is the key to keeping the prop cranking with ANY motor, not just a
2-stroke. Just so happens, regarding the Rotax motors, we know how to
- prop them
- jet them
- run them
- maintain them
- install them
- fix them.
We know what works generally and what doesn't work with them and we know how
to work around the weaknesses and exploit the strengths.
In other words, reliability is actually a complicated combination of motor
quality and operator intervention. But for sure our Rotaxen do a very
reliable job of cranking props on airplanes for 100's of hours AND that's
NOT the result of accident. It's because of the knowledge we have about them
as I alluded to above.
I'm living proof, having flown 2-strokes for years now without problems and
trust me I don't even own a pair of dice!
LS
N646F
>Michael A. Bigelow
>
>Do Not Archive
>
>
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: 2 Stroke VS 4 Stroke |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Ed Chmielewski" <edchmiel@mindspring.com>
Hi Mike,
I think you're overstating the unreliability of 2-strokes,
especially those made since the mid-80's. They tend to be as reliable as
the operator makes them (fresh fuel, correct mix and needle settings, etc.).
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Bigelow" <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: 2 Stroke VS 4 Stroke
> --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Michael Bigelow"
> <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
>
> " My 2 stroke has worked fine all these years... I will stick with the
> reliable 2 stroke Rotax 503 "
>
> That is a pretty dangerous attitude to have. Just because some have beat
> the odds so far does not mean that the 2 stroke is a realiable engine, it
> just means that you have have had the skill and a certain amount of luck
> to
> keep your 2 stroke running.
I tend to think we make our own luck, by how careful (or not) we are. I've
had 4 4-stroke (GA) engine failures in 29 years/12K+ hours. All were
mechanical, internal failures. Do I think all 4-stroke engines are faulty?
Nah. Do I trust them blindly? Nah.
> Dirt Bikes, boats, even lawn equpment is being made with more expensive 4
stroke engines, because they are simply better.
I think the clean-air laws have more to do with it than anything else.
> I ride cross country on my
> dirt bike, and I would not even consider going cross country on a 2 stroke
> bike.
I had more problems with a Honda 305 Scrambler than a Yamaha 250. That
thing wouldn't die!
> For that moment when the 2
> stroke quits unexpectedly, the 4 stroke pays for itself instantly.
But what if the 4-stroke quits unexpectedly? Call the mfgr. and complain on
the way down?
I am
> willing to take risks in pursuit of what I love to do, but I never never
> forgot the fact that my 2 stroke was an engine that would quit at any
> moment.
Then why fly with it, if it's that unsafe?
Just because some
> have beat the odds does not change the fact that 2 stroke engines are
> substandard in realiability, and that one day they will quit at the worst
> possible time.
Ther's never an opportune time, be they 2-stroke, 4-stroke, Wankel, turbine,
or rocket. I might even argue your points promote complacency around the
use of 4-strokes. (What, me worry?).
I think the reliability issues (talking about Rotax) have had much more to
due with operator error than inherent, by-design unreliability. How about
the snowmobiles used in the Arctic where people trust them with their lives
daily, or the PWC on the lake? Just two extremes...
I also fly RC, where 2-strokes are the rule and 4-strokes the minority. I
fly both, and find I can mess either up equally well if not paying
attention.
Just MHO.
Ed in JXN
MkII/503
Do not archive.
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | 2 Stroke VS 4 Stroke |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: WillUribe@aol.com
Hola Mike,
You Sir are a scare monger, to allude that a 4 stroke is some mystical,
magical engine that will always keep you in the air is false. Luck or beating
the odds has nothing to do with it.
Like I said, If you don't take care of your engine it will not take care of
you.
I hope you haven't stopped looking for emergency landing spots just because
your flying with a Rotax 912s. I do it all the time, even when flying the
Cessna, and I never forget an engine, any engine, may quit at any time.
Sad to say a Rotax 912 engine may quit at the worst possible time just as
fast as a Rotax 503. It doesn't matter why this 912 quit, it did quit and at
the worst possible time.
_http://members.aol.com/willuribe/912.jpg_
(http://members.aol.com/willuribe/912.jpg)
One of these days I will sell my FireStar and build me a Kolbra or a MK III
and I will install a 4 stroke (maybe when I win the lotto). But right now
I'm having too much fun with my little 2 stroke powered FireStar.
Regards,
Will Uribe
El Paso, TX
FireStar II N4GU
C-172 N2506U
Restoring a PA-22-108 N4551Z
_http://home.elp.rr.com/airplane_ (http://home.elp.rr.com/airplane)
Do Not Archive
BTW: Any Kolbers in Des Moines, Iowa?
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael Bigelow
Subject: Kolb-List: 2 Stroke VS 4 Stroke
--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Michael Bigelow" <orcabonita@hotmail.com>
" My 2 stroke has worked fine all these years... I will stick with the
reliable 2 stroke Rotax 503 "
That is a pretty dangerous attitude to have. Just because some have beat
the odds so far does not mean that the 2 stroke is a realiable engine, it
just means that you have have had the skill and a certain amount of luck to
keep your 2 stroke running. I flew one of the first weight shit
Quicksilvers with a 10 HP Chrysler 2 stroke engine on it, which never gave
me a problem... That being said, I never forgot what I had, an engine with a
horrible record of quitting and I always respected it as such. 2 Strokes
have improved vastly since then, but they are still 2 stroke engines and
they dont even compare to 4 strokes reliability wise... Never forget it.
Dirt Bikes, boats, even lawn equpment is being made with more expensive 4
stroke engines, because they are simply better. I ride cross country on my
dirt bike, and I would not even consider going cross country on a 2 stroke
bike. I am even less willing to fly over trees, terrain, etc with a 2
stroke engine in my ultralight. The 4 stroke engines are expensive, but
they are well worth the extra money. If you look at the increased fuel and
oil usage, the continual maintenance and rebuilds, if you fly a lot, the 4
stroke eventaully pays for itself over time. For that moment when the 2
stroke quits unexpectedly, the 4 stroke pays for itself instantly. I know
that 16,000 for a 912-s or 8,000 for the HKS is a lot of money, but if this
is the hobby you enjoy and you fly alot, it is worth doing whatever it takes
to get the best engine you can. I have worked more extra days than I can
shake a stick at to afford my 912, but it is well worth it. I love to fly,
and there was a time I could not possibly afford a 4 storke engine, and in
that case I flew 2 strokes rather than walk (that was a Joke :) I am
willing to take risks in pursuit of what I love to do, but I never never
forgot the fact that my 2 stroke was an engine that would quit at any
moment. I think we should always honest with ourselves and others about 2
strokes, tell newcomers that they are not reliable, that they are much more
likely to quit than a 4 storke, and let each person make an intelligent
choice based on the type of flying they do. We are doing a great disservice
to everyone by giving others a false sense of security by saying " 2 strokes
are reliable, I have never had a problem with mine". Just because some
have beat the odds does not change the fact that 2 stroke engines are
substandard in realiability, and that one day they will quit at the worst
possible time.
Michael A. Bigelow
Do Not Archive
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | RE: HKS on a FS11 |
--> Kolb-List message posted by: WillUribe@aol.com
Hi John,
I'm guilt as charged, I have not been keeping up with all the posts. I too
would love to have more range. On our long trip, one time, we had to walk for
miles to get some fuel. But I would rather sell my FireStar and build me a
Kolbra or a MK III. It's just hard to believe the HKS costs as much as what
I paid for my FireStar kit.
Regards,
Will Uribe
El Paso, TX
FireStar II N4GU
C-172 N2506U
Restoring a PA-22-108 N4551Z
_http://home.elp.rr.com/airplane_ (http://home.elp.rr.com/airplane)
Do Not Archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kolb-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Jung
Subject: Kolb-List: RE: HKS on a FS11
--> Kolb-List message posted by: John Jung <jrjungjr@yahoo.com>
Will and Group,
Will, too bad you only read some on the posts. You missed my point. I
started this thread and the reason that I am considering the HKS is not
because of reliability. My 503 has been fantastically reliable for 200
hours. It is to increase the range and cruise speed. And, I know that
because of your long trip with a 503, you could still say "Who needs
more range?". But it is something that I would like to have.
John Jung
Firestar II N6163J
Surprise, AZ
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! --
|