Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:15 AM - Re: smoke (Richard Pike)
2. 09:41 AM - Re: Mz 201 (FIRESTARII)
3. 10:42 AM - Re: Re: Mz 201 (Phil)
4. 11:02 AM - Re: smoke (cristalclear13)
5. 01:47 PM - Re: Re: Mz 201 (Gary Aman)
6. 02:12 PM - Re: Re: Mz 201 (John Hauck)
7. 03:58 PM - Re: Re: Mz 201 (chris davis)
8. 04:17 PM - Re: Re: Mz 201 (chris davis)
9. 06:04 PM - Re: smoke (Richard Pike)
10. 06:06 PM - Re: Re: Mz 201 (HShack@aol.com)
11. 07:12 PM - Re: Re: Mz 201 (Phil)
12. 07:35 PM - Re: Re: smoke (Larry Cottrell)
13. 07:55 PM - Re: smoke (Richard Pike)
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 |
|
I think I spent $10 when I built mine back in 1985. Worked fine.
--------
Richard Pike
Kolb MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
richard (at) bcchapel(dot)org
Kingsport, TN 3TN0
Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
Hebrews 11:1
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=360953#360953
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 |
|
:D Ok guys and gals ya'all got me thinking.... I know next to nothing about the
MZ engines and have been seriously considering a re-power of my DCDI-503 powered
FSII simply because the engine has very near 300 hours TT. NOW, when I
posted that I was considering a Hirth some of you got all abrasive [Rolling Eyes]
Is, in your opinion, the MZ a better/same/worse choice than the Hirth?
Or do you die hard Rotax folks think I am simply better off having the 503 rebuilt
and sticking with what I have??? :? I am not trying to rock the boat again
just wondering how the MZ compares to the Hirth and the Rotax?
--------
Low and Slow FireStar II
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=360964#360964
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 |
|
I decided on the mz201 for my Firefly. I only know what I've studied online
about Simonini, Hirth, Rotax (used to own a 503 on my past Twinstar), and
the mz line. I will know a lot more once I get my Firefly built and start r
unning my mz201 on it (in the Spring).
My mz201 weighs in at 75lbs total fly-weight without the mounting plates an
d h/w for the engine and exhaust system, but including everything else; bel
t reduc, air filter, carb, muffler, elec and pull starters, all ignition co
mponents (harness, dual CDI, dual plugs). I thought it would weigh a few po
unds less, but as far as I can tell, this is still 15-19 lbs less than the
447, with 4-5 HP more.
Phil H.
--- On Thu, 12/15/11, FIRESTARII <CCMFarms@aol.com> wrote:
From: FIRESTARII <CCMFarms@aol.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Mz 201
:D Ok guys and gals- ya'all got me thinking.... I know next to nothing ab
out the MZ engines and have been seriously considering a re-power of my DCD
I-503 powered FSII simply because the engine has very near 300 hours TT.-
NOW,- when I posted that I was considering a Hirth some of you got all a
brasive [Rolling Eyes]---Is, in your opinion, the MZ a better/same/wo
rse choice than the Hirth?- Or do you die hard Rotax folks think I am sim
ply better off having the 503 rebuilt and sticking with what I have??? :?
---I am not trying to rock the boat again just wondering how the MZ c
ompares to the Hirth and the Rotax?
--------
Low and Slow FireStar II
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=360964#360964
le, List Admin.
le, List Admin.
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 |
|
I just wonder where would be the best place to put the container holding the oil
in my little plane. I don't think I'd want something permanent because of the
weight. And I wouldn't want to throw myself out of balance.
It sounds like some training from an experienced person might be in order if there
is a possibility of the oil catching on fire if you turn it on or off at the
wrong time.
It just doesn't sound as easy as I had imagined. I guess I thought maybe something
already built could just be attached. I'm not much of a builder.
And would the speed of the plane matter? I would think it would.
--------
Cristal Waters
Kolb Mark II Twinstar Rotax 503 DCSI Sept 2007
Private Pilot Aug 2008
ELSA Repairman for N193Y April 2008
Rotax 2 stroke maintenance April 2009
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=360971#360971
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 |
|
I really believe my 503dcdi can't be the only one to run over 650 hrs.Do a
de-carbon if you want to but I'd never overhaul a good running 503 at 300hr
s.
G.Aman
-----Original Message-----
From: FIRESTARII <CCMFarms@aol.com>
Sent: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 12:41 pm
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Mz 201
:D Ok guys and gals ya'all got me thinking.... I know next to nothing abou
t the
MZ engines and have been seriously considering a re-power of my DCDI-503 po
wered
FSII simply because the engine has very near 300 hours TT. NOW, when I po
sted
that I was considering a Hirth some of you got all abrasive [Rolling Eyes]
Is,
in your opinion, the MZ a better/same/worse choice than the Hirth? Or do y
ou
die hard Rotax folks think I am simply better off having the 503 rebuilt an
d
sticking with what I have??? :? I am not trying to rock the boat again ju
st
wondering how the MZ compares to the Hirth and the Rotax?
--------
Low and Slow FireStar II
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=360964#360964
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 |
|
I really believe my 503dcdi can't be the only one to run over 650 hrs.Do a
de-carbon if you want to but I'd never overhaul a good running 503 at
300hrs.
G.Aman
Gary A/Gang:
I'm with Gary on this one. The Rotax TBO for ultralight and experimental
aircraft engines is "recommended" only. Not required. It doesn't mean you
must go with a new crank, pistons, rings, etc. What it means is to look and
verify if a component is out of spec and needs replacing.
If it was my engine, I'd run it, like I have all my two strokes and four
strokes, run them until they start to tell me they are getting tired or give
me some other indication they don't feel well.
Establishing a base line compression test when the engine is new might be a
good idea to tell you if it is getting tired later on in life.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
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 |
|
John im with you on this and most everything else aircrasft wise . I flew m
yRotax 503, -492 hrs just checked the rings every year and used the right
amount of oil and before it was sold i sent it to be rebuilt the report fr
om "LOCKHEAD' was the engine was in very good condition .I never decarboned
the engine as I believed I would do more damage taking it apart and puttin
g it back together ! and i am an LA tech trained motorcycle mechanic Im not
saying that the average used and somtimes abused rotax 503 shouldnt be tak
en care of by the numbers but those numbers are "recomended " not etched in
chromemoly . Chris
Chris Davis
KXP 503 492 hrs
Glider Pilot
Disabled from crash building Firefly
--- On Thu, 12/15/11, John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com> wrote:
From: John Hauck <jhauck@elmore.rr.com>
Subject: RE: Kolb-List: Re: Mz 201
I really believe my 503dcdi can't be the only one to run over 650 hrs.Do a
de-carbon if you want to but I'd never overhaul a good running 503 at
300hrs.
G.Aman
Gary A/Gang:
I'm with Gary on this one.- The Rotax TBO for ultralight and experimental
aircraft engines is "recommended" only.- Not required.- It doesn't mean
you
must go with a new crank, pistons, rings, etc.- What it means is to look
and
verify if a component is out of spec and needs replacing.
If it was my engine, I'd run it, like I have all my two strokes and four
strokes, run them until they start to tell me they are getting tired or giv
e
me some other indication they don't feel well.
Establishing a base line compression test when the engine is new might be a
good idea to tell you if it is getting tired later on in life.
john h
mkIII
Titus, Alabama
le, List Admin.
le, List Admin.
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 |
|
Phil , Did you happen to ask what the weight of the fan cooling system woul
d be?I am Only concerned Bryan at Kolb was worried about cooling .- Why n
ot take off the pullstart and add the fan cooling I think that would be a e
ven trade. I am going to Email the factory and ask the questiion tonight. I
will let you know as soon as I get an answer Chris
Chris Davis
KXP 503 492 hrs
Glider Pilot
Disabled from crash building Firefly
--- On Thu, 12/15/11, Phil <phactor9@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: Phil <phactor9@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Mz 201
I decided on the mz201 for my Firefly. I only know what I've studied online
about Simonini, Hirth, Rotax (used to own a 503 on my past Twinstar), and
the mz line. I will know a lot more once I get my Firefly built and start r
unning my mz201 on it (in the Spring).
My mz201 weighs in at 75lbs total fly-weight without the mounting plates an
d h/w for the engine and exhaust system, but including everything else; bel
t reduc, air filter, carb, muffler, elec and pull starters, all ignition co
mponents (harness, dual CDI, dual plugs). I thought it would weigh a few po
unds less, but as far as I can tell, this is still 15-19 lbs less than the
447, with 4-5 HP more.
Phil H.
--- On Thu, 12/15/11, FIRESTARII <CCMFarms@aol.com> wrote:
From: FIRESTARII <CCMFarms@aol.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Mz 201
:D Ok guys and gals- ya'all got me thinking.... I know next to nothing ab
out the MZ engines and have been seriously considering a re-power of my DCD
I-503 powered FSII simply because the engine has very near 300 hours TT.-
NOW,- when I posted that I was considering a Hirth some of you got all a
brasive [Rolling Eyes]---Is, in your opinion, the MZ a better/same/wo
rse choice than the Hirth?- Or do you die hard Rotax folks think I am sim
ply better off having the 503 rebuilt and sticking with what I have??? :?
---I am not trying to rock the boat again just wondering how the MZ c
ompares to the Hirth and the Rotax?
--------
Low and Slow FireStar II
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=36="http://www.matronics.co
m/contribution" target=_blank>http://www.matro- - - - - - -
- - - -Mattvigator?Kolb-List" sp;--> http://f=- - - - -
---- List Contributionsp; - - - - - - - - - - &bs
p;-->
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 |
|
cristalclear13 wrote:
> I just wonder where would be the best place to put the container holding the
oil in my little plane. I don't think I'd want something permanent because of
the weight. And I wouldn't want to throw myself out of balance.
> It sounds like some training from an experienced person might be in order if
there is a possibility of the oil catching on fire if you turn it on or off at
the wrong time.
> It just doesn't sound as easy as I had imagined. I guess I thought maybe something
already built could just be attached. I'm not much of a builder.
> And would the speed of the plane matter? I would think it would.
It really is as easy as you imagine, I think too many people make it too complicated.
I like the idea of using a pump up sprayer for the oil tank. Back in the
day I used a 2 liter bottle with a grommet in the cap and a 1/4" copper tube
to the bottom. Soldered a metal valve stem into the line a few inches outside
of the bottle, and then ran the line on up to the cockpit.
Soldered an off/on valve into the line. On the downstream (low pressure) side of
the off/on valve I used fish tank air line to run back to the engine. At the
engine I took a hose clamp and drilled a hole in it, took a length of metal brake
line and brazed a washer on it and poked it through the hose clamp so that
I could clamp the hose clamp around the exhaust pipe and the washer kept the
steel tube tight to the exhaust. Make the steel tube long enough that it won't
get hot enough to melt the plastic tube.
I was using a Rotax 277, and I drilled a hole in the middle section of the exhaust,
the part with a ball joint at each end. Pressurized the 2 liter bottle from
the air hose, the tube fit tight enough in the grommet that it wouldn't leak
down. 75 psi worked real well.
Once the engine got up to temperature, when you opened the valve, the corvis oil
would pour big clouds of smoke out the exhaust pipe. A liter of oil lasted a
long time in use. I searched the archives to see if I could find it, but couldn't.
I remember discussing this on the list years ago because when I did, somebody
took me to task for being a terrible environmentalist...
Anyway, I like the idea of using a pump up sprayer and then just rigging an off/on
valve and a nozzle - much less work and lower pressure. I never worried about
what would happen if you turned the oil on with the engine not running - that's
easy. It will fill your muffler up with oil and make one heck of a mess.
Something that was interesting is that after a few uses, you could see the pressure
pulse wave pattern in the paint, as the paint burned off in some places but
not in others. A couple years later one of the baffles in the muffler came
loose, and when I cut the can apart to weld it back, there was no mung or carbon
in the canister. Also, when you turned the oil on, the RPM went up by about
50. Must not have hurt anything, the last time I heard, that 277 had 750 hours
on the original bottom end and the second piston & rings.
--------
Richard Pike
Kolb MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
richard (at) bcchapel(dot)org
Kingsport, TN 3TN0
Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
Hebrews 11:1
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=361000#361000
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 |
|
I have stories I could tell, but they are from several years back; so I
won't
I did hear that Zanzotera founders were PO'd Hirth people and that it is
essentially the same engine.
I would rather have a 300 hr, 503 than a new MZ.
In a message dated 12/15/2011 7:17:55 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
capedavis@yahoo.com writes:
I am not trying to rock the boat again just wondering how the MZ compares
to the Hirth and the Rotax?
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 |
|
It is suggested that the 202 needs the fan, but not the 201. Time will tell
. Let us know what the reply to your inquiry is.
-
Phil H.
--- On Thu, 12/15/11, chris davis <capedavis@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: chris davis <capedavis@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Mz 201
Phil , Did you happen to ask what the weight of the fan cooling system woul
d be?I am Only concerned Bryan at Kolb was worried about cooling .- Why n
ot take off the pullstart and add the fan cooling I think that would be a e
ven trade. I am going to Email the factory and ask the questiion tonight. I
will let you know as soon as I get an answer Chris
Chris Davis
KXP 503 492 hrs
Glider Pilot
Disabled from crash building Firefly
--- On Thu, 12/15/11, Phil <phactor9@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: Phil <phactor9@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Kolb-List: Re: Mz 201
I decided on the mz201 for my Firefly. I only know what I've studied online
about Simonini, Hirth, Rotax (used to own a 503 on my past Twinstar), and
the mz line. I will know a lot more once I get my Firefly built and start r
unning my mz201 on it (in the Spring).
My mz201 weighs in at 75lbs total fly-weight without the mounting plates an
d h/w for the engine and exhaust system, but including everything else; bel
t reduc, air filter, carb, muffler, elec and pull starters, all ignition co
mponents (harness, dual CDI, dual plugs). I thought it would weigh a few po
unds less, but as far as I can tell, this is still 15-19 lbs less than the
447, with 4-5 HP more.
Phil H.
--- On Thu, 12/15/11, FIRESTARII <CCMFarms@aol.com> wrote:
From: FIRESTARII <CCMFarms@aol.com>
Subject: Kolb-List: Re: Mz 201
:D Ok guys and gals- ya'all got me thinking.... I know next to nothing ab
out the MZ engines and have been seriously considering a re-power of my DCD
I-503 powered FSII simply because the engine has very near 300 hours TT.-
NOW,- when I posted that I was considering a Hirth some of you got all a
brasive [Rolling Eyes]---Is, in your opinion, the MZ a better/same/wo
rse choice than the Hirth?- Or do you die hard Rotax folks think I am sim
ply better off having the 503 rebuilt and sticking with what I have??? :?
---I am not trying to rock the boat again just wondering how the MZ c
ompares to the Hirth and the Rotax?
--------
Low and Slow FireStar II
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=36="http://www.matronics.co
m/contribution" target=_blank>http://www.matro- - - - - - -
- - - -Mattvigator?Kolb-List" sp;--> http://f=- - - - -
---- List Contributionsp; - - - - - - - - - - &bs
p;-->
ollow target=_blank>www.aeroelectric.com
/" rel=nofollow target=_blank>www.buildersbooks.com
ofollow target=_blank>www.homebuilthelp.com
llow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
=nofollow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List
et=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com
llow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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 |
|
I find all of this conversation about having a smoke system on a Kolb to be
very interesting. I can just picture me flying down the Owyhee Canyon
leaving a smoke trail or actually more realistically, enveloped in a cloud
of smoke. Mine doesn't fly so fast that I might be able to be able to
actually see the landscape. Then of course the next question would be to
have a speed dial for the emergency services people that would be making
the 2 hour drive to get to where they thought I had gone down. Then of
course there is always the question of the artistic value of a straight
line of smoke, or if I get really frisky and throw a couple of left and
right turns in there to spice it up. I can just imagine the oohs and aaws
of the local population when I lumber by stinking up the landscape, and
getting the whole rear end of my lovely little Firestar greased up. Then
again perhaps the bullshit might slide off a little easier.
Larry
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 7:00 PM, Richard Pike <richard@bcchapel.org> wrote:
>
>
> cristalclear13 wrote:
> > I just wonder where would be the best place to put the container holding
> the oil in my little plane. I don't think I'd want something permanent
> because of the weight. And I wouldn't want to throw myself out of balance.
> > It sounds like some training from an experienced person might be in
> order if there is a possibility of the oil catching on fire if you turn it
> on or off at the wrong time.
> > It just doesn't sound as easy as I had imagined. I guess I thought
> maybe something already built could just be attached. I'm not much of a
> builder.
> > And would the speed of the plane matter? I would think it would.
>
>
> It really is as easy as you imagine, I think too many people make it too
> complicated. I like the idea of using a pump up sprayer for the oil tank.
> Back in the day I used a 2 liter bottle with a grommet in the cap and a
> 1/4" copper tube to the bottom. Soldered a metal valve stem into the line a
> few inches outside of the bottle, and then ran the line on up to the
> cockpit.
>
> Soldered an off/on valve into the line. On the downstream (low pressure)
> side of the off/on valve I used fish tank air line to run back to the
> engine. At the engine I took a hose clamp and drilled a hole in it, took a
> length of metal brake line and brazed a washer on it and poked it through
> the hose clamp so that I could clamp the hose clamp around the exhaust
> pipe and the washer kept the steel tube tight to the exhaust. Make the
> steel tube long enough that it won't get hot enough to melt the plastic
> tube.
>
> I was using a Rotax 277, and I drilled a hole in the middle section of the
> exhaust, the part with a ball joint at each end. Pressurized the 2 liter
> bottle from the air hose, the tube fit tight enough in the grommet that it
> wouldn't leak down. 75 psi worked real well.
>
> Once the engine got up to temperature, when you opened the valve, the
> corvis oil would pour big clouds of smoke out the exhaust pipe. A liter of
> oil lasted a long time in use. I searched the archives to see if I could
> find it, but couldn't. I remember discussing this on the list years ago
> because when I did, somebody took me to task for being a terrible
> environmentalist...
>
> Anyway, I like the idea of using a pump up sprayer and then just rigging
> an off/on valve and a nozzle - much less work and lower pressure. I never
> worried about what would happen if you turned the oil on with the engine
> not running - that's easy. It will fill your muffler up with oil and make
> one heck of a mess.
>
> Something that was interesting is that after a few uses, you could see the
> pressure pulse wave pattern in the paint, as the paint burned off in some
> places but not in others. A couple years later one of the baffles in the
> muffler came loose, and when I cut the can apart to weld it back, there was
> no mung or carbon in the canister. Also, when you turned the oil on, the
> RPM went up by about 50. Must not have hurt anything, the last time I
> heard, that 277 had 750 hours on the original bottom end and the second
> piston & rings.
>
> --------
> Richard Pike
> Kolb MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
> richard (at) bcchapel(dot)org
> Kingsport, TN 3TN0
> Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not
> seen.
> Hebrews 11:1
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=361000#361000
>
>
--
*If you forward this email, or any part of it, please remove my email
address before sending.*
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 |
|
lcottrell wrote:
> Then of course the next question would be to have a speed dial for the emergency
services people that would be making the 2 hour drive to get to where they
thought I had gone down.
That brings back memories - When the Hummer had the smoke system, we had a supervisor
at the tower who was a real ding-dong. If it was on a weekend when the
races were running at Bristol, I would fly over the track at altitude, put the
smoke on, and then descend and disappear behind the next ridge over, knowing
that Milt the Moron was getting bombarded by people calling the tower telling
him that they thought they had seen a plane go down.
That was before I started preaching - now I don't get to do that stuff anymore;
I have to behave.
--------
Richard Pike
Kolb MKIII N420P (420ldPoops)
richard (at) bcchapel(dot)org
Kingsport, TN 3TN0
Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
Hebrews 11:1
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=361006#361006
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! --
|