Pietenpol-List Digest Archive

Thu 01/30/14


Total Messages Posted: 15



Today's Message Index:
----------------------
 
     1. 07:53 AM - leather coaming (Douwe Blumberg)
     2. 11:35 AM - Re: CENTER SECTION FUEL TANK (nightmare)
     3. 01:29 PM - Re: Re: CENTER SECTION FUEL TANK (TGSTONE236@aol.com)
     4. 03:39 PM - A-65 (Charles Burkholder)
     5. 04:17 PM - Re: A-65 (Gary Boothe)
     6. 04:27 PM - Re: A-65 (Jack)
     7. 04:41 PM - Re: A-65 (glenschweizer@yahoo.com)
     8. 05:02 PM - Re: A-65 (airlion2@gmail.com)
     9. 05:10 PM - Re: A-65 (Brian Kenney)
    10. 05:16 PM - Re: A-65 (Greg Cardinal)
    11. 05:27 PM - Re: A-65 (Andre B. Charvet)
    12. 05:29 PM - Re: A-65 (Jack)
    13. 05:38 PM - Re: A-65 (Brian Kenney)
    14. 06:29 PM - Re: A-65 (Charles Burkholder)
    15. 06:34 PM - Re: A-65 (Brian Kenney)
 
 
 


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
    Time: 07:53:09 AM PST US
    From: "Douwe Blumberg" <douweblumberg@earthlink.net>
    Subject: leather coaming
    Hey Ken, I just did a google search for leather suppliers and found a place that had a decent selection of "distressed" leather which is the look I wanted. I seem to have deleted them from my address book and it's been a while now so I don't remember who it was. Too thin and your grommets can tear as you snug things up, too thick and it won't form well to the compound curves. Thinner equals a smoother job. Let me ck, but I might still have enough from my purchase for you to use. Dan's article on how he did his coaming proved very helpful. Douwe


    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
    Time: 11:35:33 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: CENTER SECTION FUEL TANK
    From: "nightmare" <pauldonahuepilot@yahoo.com>
    Very nice ted. Does your wing tank flow directly into the header tank, or use a selector valve? -------- Paul Donahue Started 8-3-12 do not archive Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=417895#417895


    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
    Time: 01:29:48 PM PST US
    From: TGSTONE236@aol.com
    Subject: Re: CENTER SECTION FUEL TANK
    I USE A SELECTOR VALVE In a message dated 1/30/2014 2:35:57 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, pauldonahuepilot@yahoo.com writes: --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "nightmare" <pauldonahuepilot@yahoo.com> Very nice ted. Does your wing tank flow directly into the header tank, or use a selector valve? -------- Paul Donahue Started 8-3-12 do not archive Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=417895#417895


    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
    Time: 03:39:44 PM PST US
    From: Charles Burkholder <born2fly@abcmailbox.net>
    Subject: A-65
    Hi guys, I have an opportunity to buy a newly overhauled Continental A-65 for a reasonable price. It's been redone by an expert that knows how to rebuild an engine blindfolded and with one hand tied behind his back. Except he's very vocal that I will regret putting such a small engine in and that I should put a O-200 on, at the least. Maybe even a 125 hp.... I'm wondering if anybody can give me performance reports for the A-65, 85 and O-200. Takeoff, Feet per minute and cruise etc..... I learned how to fly behind a 65 and sure, you do takeoff a few seconds later then normal. But then again nobody builds a Piet to get anywhere fast..... CB


    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
    Time: 04:17:55 PM PST US
    Subject: Re: A-65
    From: Gary Boothe <gboothe5@comcast.net>
    Charles, The airplane was originally designed for, and still flies today, on 50 hp Model A's! Gary Sent from my iPhone > On Jan 30, 2014, at 3:39 PM, Charles Burkholder <born2fly@abcmailbox.net> wrote: > > > Hi guys, > I have an opportunity to buy a newly overhauled Continental A-65 for a reasonable price. It's been redone by an expert that knows how to rebuild an engine blindfolded and with one hand tied behind his back. Except he's very vocal that I will regret putting such a small engine in and that I should put a O-200 on, at the least. Maybe even a 125 hp.... I'm wondering if anybody can give me performance reports for the A-65, 85 and O-200. Takeoff, Feet per minute and cruise etc..... > I learned how to fly behind a 65 and sure, you do takeoff a few seconds later then normal. But then again nobody builds a Piet to get anywhere fast..... > CB > > > >


    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
    Time: 04:27:37 PM PST US
    Subject: Re: A-65
    From: Jack <jack@textors.com>
    Charles it all depends on your gross weight...Built light it will be fine. Heavy it will be a dog... Sent from my iPad Jack Textor On Jan 30, 2014, at 5:39 PM, Charles Burkholder <born2fly@abcmailbox.net> wrote: > > Hi guys, > I have an opportunity to buy a newly overhauled Continental A-65 for a reasonable price. It's been redone by an expert that knows how to rebuild an engine blindfolded and with one hand tied behind his back. Except he's very vocal that I will regret putting such a small engine in and that I should put a O-200 on, at the least. Maybe even a 125 hp.... I'm wondering if anybody can give me performance reports for the A-65, 85 and O-200. Takeoff, Feet per minute and cruise etc..... > I learned how to fly behind a 65 and sure, you do takeoff a few seconds later then normal. But then again nobody builds a Piet to get anywhere fast..... > CB > > > >


    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
    Time: 04:41:16 PM PST US
    From: glenschweizer@yahoo.com
    Subject: Re: A-65
    Don't try to make this airplane something it isn't. 65 hp really should be more than enough considering its lighter than the model t (50hp) that it was designed for. Speed is limited by design maximums and drag if you need more than what the Piet was designed for then maybe build something else? No disrespect intended. fly safe. glen Sent from my iPhone > On Jan 30, 2014, at 3:39 PM, Charles Burkholder <born2fly@abcmailbox.net> wrote: > > > Hi guys, > I have an opportunity to buy a newly overhauled Continental A-65 for a reasonable price. It's been redone by an expert that knows how to rebuild an engine blindfolded and with one hand tied behind his back. Except he's very vocal that I will regret putting such a small engine in and that I should put a O-200 on, at the least. Maybe even a 125 hp.... I'm wondering if anybody can give me performance reports for the A-65, 85 and O-200. Takeoff, Feet per minute and cruise etc..... > I learned how to fly behind a 65 and sure, you do takeoff a few seconds later then normal. But then again nobody builds a Piet to get anywhere fast..... > CB > > > >


    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
    Time: 05:02:07 PM PST US
    Subject: Re: A-65
    From: airlion2@gmail.com
    Hi. I just bought a low time C85 to replace my corvair. It should perform about the same as the corvair and I will let y'all know when I get it up and running. Gardiner Sent from my iPad > On Jan 30, 2014, at 6:39 PM, Charles Burkholder <born2fly@abcmailbox.net> wrote: > > > Hi guys, > I have an opportunity to buy a newly overhauled Continental A-65 for a reasonable price. It's been redone by an expert that knows how to rebuild an engine blindfolded and with one hand tied behind his back. Except he's very vocal that I will regret putting such a small engine in and that I should put a O-200 on, at the least. Maybe even a 125 hp.... I'm wondering if anybody can give me performance reports for the A-65, 85 and O-200. Takeoff, Feet per minute and cruise etc..... > I learned how to fly behind a 65 and sure, you do takeoff a few seconds later then normal. But then again nobody builds a Piet to get anywhere fast..... > CB > > > >


    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
    Time: 05:10:55 PM PST US
    From: Brian Kenney <brian.kenney@live.ca>
    Subject: A-65
    hope I am doing this right - my first post I have 26 years flying an A-65 in my Piet. It is nearly the perfect engine for the air camper. I weight over 200 lbs and I have taken three different passengers that weigh about 250 lbs. It fly's that weight no problem but my empty weight is around 600Lbs. Realize that a 65 and a 75 are virtually i dentical and you can have anything between 65 and 75 hp with a different pr op. The prop is critical. There is no such thing as a cruise prop for this application. If you are not achieving redline in climb you actually have a smaller engine then you think. I run my A-65 as an A-70 horsepower without any modification by letting it rev higher than 2300 rpm. The engine map in the manual will show you how. There are good reasons to use a C-85 or 0-200 - the main is the engine weig ht - the A-65 is too light for some completed air campers that are built ta il heavy. It makes a poor airplane if you end up with nose that is too long or a wing that is too far aft or both. The option is then there of adding accessories like a starter=2C battery and/or a generator to solve a cg pro blem. weight is critical with horsepower and the power helps compensate for a hea ver and over equipped airplane. where you live is also important. the higher the airport the more you will want power. The hotter it is the same applies. remember is you don't want to prop then don't use a A-65. the cylinders on a c-85 or 0-200 are more durable and are easier to get. I love mine - I am good with it. I am working on making a A-65 into a 85 ho rsepower with adding c-85 cylinders - this can be done but you have to inve stigate this and draw your own conclusions. brian kenney > Date: Thu=2C 30 Jan 2014 18:39:59 -0500 > From: born2fly@abcmailbox.net > To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com > Subject: Pietenpol-List: A-65 > lbox.net> > > Hi guys=2C > I have an opportunity to buy a newly overhauled Continental A-65 for a > reasonable price. It's been redone by an expert that knows how to > rebuild an engine blindfolded and with one hand tied behind his back. > Except he's very vocal that I will regret putting such a small engine in > and that I should put a O-200 on=2C at the least. Maybe even a 125 hp.... > I'm wondering if anybody can give me performance reports for the A-65=2C > 85 and O-200. Takeoff=2C Feet per minute and cruise etc..... > I learned how to fly behind a 65 and sure=2C you do takeoff a few seconds > later then normal. But then again nobody builds a Piet to get anywhere > fast..... > CB > =========== =========== =========== =========== > > >


    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
    Time: 05:16:24 PM PST US
    From: "Greg Cardinal" <gcardinal@comcast.net>
    Subject: Re: A-65
    Charles, I have about 350 hours on NX18235 with the A-65 and I am very happy with it. The airplane was built light, empty weight is 620 lbs. It has a course pitch cruise prop. It has flown at weights up to approx. 1200# with no problems. On a cool day and light weight it will climb 600 - 700 fpm and cruise at 80 - 85 mph. On a hot day with a couple of 200# people and full fuel the climb rate is 200 - 250 fpm and cruise at 65 - 70 mph. This is out of an airport with a field elevation of 920'. The airplane is sensitive to density altitude. In the upper midwest where field elevations seldom are higher than 1200' and giving rides mostly to kids, the A-65 is a perfect match for a lightly built Air Camper. Greg Cardinal Minneapolis ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles Burkholder" <born2fly@abcmailbox.net> Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2014 5:39 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: A-65 > <born2fly@abcmailbox.net> > > Hi guys, > I have an opportunity to buy a newly overhauled Continental A-65 for a > reasonable price. It's been redone by an expert that knows how to rebuild > an engine blindfolded and with one hand tied behind his back. Except he's > very vocal that I will regret putting such a small engine in and that I > should put a O-200 on, at the least. Maybe even a 125 hp.... I'm wondering > if anybody can give me performance reports for the A-65, 85 and O-200. > Takeoff, Feet per minute and cruise etc..... > I learned how to fly behind a 65 and sure, you do takeoff a few seconds > later then normal. But then again nobody builds a Piet to get anywhere > fast..... > CB > > >


    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
    Time: 05:27:53 PM PST US
    Subject: Re: A-65
    From: "Andre B. Charvet" <bencharvet@gmail.com>
    My plane weighs 695 lbs empty, and I weigh around 175. With 12 gallons of fuel I usually climb out around 500 ft/min solo, and probably a little more than half that at gross of 1200 lbs. What I love about the A65 is the simplicity of no electrical system (no transponder required yet) mine starts on the first blade 90% of the time. As someone else said, if you build light the A65 is a great choice Ben Charvet NX866BC A65 with Sensenich 72x40 prop Charles Burkholder <born2fly@abcmailbox.net> wrote: > >Hi guys, >I have an opportunity to buy a newly overhauled Continental A-65 for a >reasonable price. It's been redone by an expert that knows how to >rebuild an engine blindfolded and with one hand tied behind his back. >Except he's very vocal that I will regret putting such a small engine in >and that I should put a O-200 on, at the least. Maybe even a 125 hp.... >I'm wondering if anybody can give me performance reports for the A-65, >85 and O-200. Takeoff, Feet per minute and cruise etc..... >I learned how to fly behind a 65 and sure, you do takeoff a few seconds >later then normal. But then again nobody builds a Piet to get anywhere >fast..... >CB > >


    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
    Time: 05:29:22 PM PST US
    Subject: Re: A-65
    From: Jack <jack@textors.com>
    What Brian said. Well said, where you from Brian? Sent from my iPad Jack Textor On Jan 30, 2014, at 7:10 PM, Brian Kenney <brian.kenney@live.ca> wrote: > hope I am doing this right - my first post > > I have 26 years flying an A-65 in my Piet. It is nearly the perfect engine for the air camper. I weight over 200 lbs and I have taken three different p assengers that weigh about 250 lbs. It fly's that weight no problem but my e mpty weight is around 600Lbs. Realize that a 65 and a 75 are virtually iden tical and you can have anything between 65 and 75 hp with a different prop. T he prop is critical. There is no such thing as a cruise prop for this applic ation. If you are not achieving redline in climb you actually have a smaller engine then you think. I run my A-65 as an A-70 horsepower without any modi fication by letting it rev higher than 2300 rpm. The engine map in the manua l will show you how. > > There are good reasons to use a C-85 or 0-200 - the main is the engine wei ght - the A-65 is too light for some completed air campers that are built ta il heavy. It makes a poor airplane if you end up with nose that is too long o r a wing that is too far aft or both. The option is then there of adding ac cessories like a starter, battery and/or a generator to solve a cg problem. > > weight is critical with horsepower and the power helps compensate for a he aver and over equipped airplane. > > where you live is also important. the higher the airport the more you will want power. The hotter it is the same applies. > > remember is you don't want to prop then don't use a A-65. > > the cylinders on a c-85 or 0-200 are more durable and are easier to get. > > I love mine - I am good with it. I am working on making a A-65 into a 85 h orsepower with adding c-85 cylinders - this can be done but you have to inve stigate this and draw your own conclusions. > > brian kenney > > > > > > > Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 18:39:59 -0500 > > From: born2fly@abcmailbox.net > > To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com > > Subject: Pietenpol-List: A-65 > > ilbox.net> > > > > Hi guys, > > I have an opportunity to buy a newly overhauled Continental A-65 for a > > reasonable price. It's been redone by an expert that knows how to > > rebuild an engine blindfolded and with one hand tied behind his back. > > Except he's very vocal that I will regret putting such a small engine in > > and that I should put a O-200 on, at the least. Maybe even a 125 hp.... > > I'm wondering if anybody can give me performance reports for the A-65, > > 85 and O-200. Takeoff, Feet per minute and cruise etc..... > > I learned how to fly behind a 65 and sure, you do takeoff a few seconds > > later then normal. But then again nobody builds a Piet to get anywhere = Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, > &g= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List > > ======================== > > > > > > > > ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= >


    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
    Time: 05:38:17 PM PST US
    From: Brian Kenney <brian.kenney@live.ca>
    Subject: A-65
    Ontario Canada - C-FAUK Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: A-65 From: jack@textors.com What Brian said. Well said=2C where you from Brian? Sent from my iPadJack Textor On Jan 30=2C 2014=2C at 7:10 PM=2C Brian Kenney <brian.kenney@live.ca> wrot e: =0A =0A =0A hope I am doing this right - my first post I have 26 years flying an A-65 in my Piet. It is nearly the perfect engine for the air camper. I weight over 200 lbs and I have taken three different passengers that weigh about 250 lbs. It fly's that weight no problem but my empty weight is around 600Lbs. Realize that a 65 and a 75 are virtually i dentical and you can have anything between 65 and 75 hp with a different pr op. The prop is critical. There is no such thing as a cruise prop for this application. If you are not achieving redline in climb you actually have a smaller engine then you think. I run my A-65 as an A-70 horsepower without any modification by letting it rev higher than 2300 rpm. The engine map in the manual will show you how. There are good reasons to use a C-85 or 0-200 - the main is the engine weig ht - the A-65 is too light for some completed air campers that are built ta il heavy. It makes a poor airplane if you end up with nose that is too long or a wing that is too far aft or both. The option is then there of adding accessories like a starter=2C battery and/or a generator to solve a cg pro blem. weight is critical with horsepower and the power helps compensate for a hea ver and over equipped airplane. where you live is also important. the higher the airport the more you will want power. The hotter it is the same applies. remember is you don't want to prop then don't use a A-65. the cylinders on a c-85 or 0-200 are more durable and are easier to get. I love mine - I am good with it. I am working on making a A-65 into a 85 ho rsepower with adding c-85 cylinders - this can be done but you have to inve stigate this and draw your own conclusions. brian kenney > Date: Thu=2C 30 Jan 2014 18:39:59 -0500 > From: born2fly@abcmailbox.net > To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com > Subject: Pietenpol-List: A-65 > lbox.net> > > Hi guys=2C > I have an opportunity to buy a newly overhauled Continental A-65 for a > reasonable price. It's been redone by an expert that knows how to > rebuild an engine blindfolded and with one hand tied behind his back. > Except he's very vocal that I will regret putting such a small engine in > and that I should put a O-200 on=2C at the least. Maybe even a 125 hp.... > I'm wondering if anybody can give me performance reports for the A-65=2C > 85 and O-200. Takeoff=2C Feet per minute and cruise etc..... > I learned how to fly behind a 65 and sure=2C you do takeoff a few seconds > later then normal. But then again nobody builds a Piet to get anywhere = Archive Search & Download=2C 7-Day Browse=2C Chat=2C FAQ=2C &g= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List > ======================= > > > =0A =0A =0A =0A ===========0A >http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List=0A ===========0A cs.com=0A ===========0A matronics.com/contribution=0A ===========0A =0A =0A =0A =0A ============0A ============0A ============0A ============0A =0A


    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
    Time: 06:29:01 PM PST US
    From: Charles Burkholder <born2fly@abcmailbox.net>
    Subject: Re: A-65
    Hello Brian nice to have you on this forum. I want to come down and go over your plane sometime and take TONS of pictures of a bunch of different spots. I remember the ride in your Piet and it didn't seem bad at all with the 65hp. Regards, Charles Burkholder On 1/30/2014 8:38 PM, Brian Kenney wrote: > Ontario Canada - C-FAUK > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: A-65 > From: jack@textors.com > Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 19:28:48 -0600 > To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com > > What Brian said. Well said, where you from Brian? > > Sent from my iPad > Jack Textor > > On Jan 30, 2014, at 7:10 PM, Brian Kenney <brian.kenney@live.ca > <mailto:brian.kenney@live.ca>> wrote: > > hope I am doing this right - my first post > > I have 26 years flying an A-65 in my Piet. It is nearly the > perfect engine for the air camper. I weight over 200 lbs and I > have taken three different passengers that weigh about 250 lbs. It > fly's that weight no problem but my empty weight is around > 600Lbs. Realize that a 65 and a 75 are virtually identical and > you can have anything between 65 and 75 hp with a different prop. > The prop is critical. There is no such thing as a cruise prop for > this application. If you are not achieving redline in climb you > actually have a smaller engine then you think. I run my A-65 as an > A-70 horsepower without any modification by letting it rev higher > than 2300 rpm. The engine map in the manual will show you how. > > There are good reasons to use a C-85 or 0-200 - the main is the > engine weight - the A-65 is too light for some completed air > campers that are built tail heavy. It makes a poor airplane if you > end up with nose that is too long or a wing that is too far aft or > both. The option is then there of adding accessories like a > starter, battery and/or a generator to solve a cg problem. > > weight is critical with horsepower and the power helps compensate > for a heaver and over equipped airplane. > > where you live is also important. the higher the airport the more > you will want power. The hotter it is the same applies. > > remember is you don't want to prop then don't use a A-65. > > the cylinders on a c-85 or 0-200 are more durable and are easier > to get. > > I love mine - I am good with it. I am working on making a A-65 > into a 85 horsepower with adding c-85 cylinders - this can be done > but you have to investigate this and draw your own conclusions. > > brian kenney > > > > Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 18:39:59 -0500 > > From: born2fly@abcmailbox.net <mailto:born2fly@abcmailbox.net> > > To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com > <mailto:pietenpol-list@matronics.com> > > Subject: Pietenpol-List: A-65 > > > <born2fly@abcmailbox.net <mailto:born2fly@abcmailbox.net>> > > > > Hi guys, > > I have an opportunity to buy a newly overhauled Continental A-65 > for a > > reasonable price. It's been redone by an expert that knows how to > > rebuild an engine blindfolded and with one hand tied behind his > back. > > Except he's very vocal that I will regret putting such a small > engine in > > and that I should put a O-200 on, at the least. Maybe even a 125 > hp.... > > I'm wondering if anybody can give me performance reports for the > A-65, > > 85 and O-200. Takeoff, Feet per minute and cruise etc..... > > I learned how to fly behind a 65 and sure, you do takeoff a few > seconds > > later then normal. But then again nobody builds a Piet to get > anywhere = Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, > &g= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List > > ======================= > > > > > > > > * > > ========= > >http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List > ========= > cs.com > ========= > matronics.com/contribution > ========= > > * > > * > > ========== > st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List > ========== > http://forums.matronics.com > ========== > ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution > ========== > > * > * > > > *


    Message 15


  • INDEX
  • Back to Main INDEX
  • PREVIOUS
  • Skip to PREVIOUS Message
  • NEXT
  • Skip to NEXT Message
  • LIST
  • Reply to LIST Regarding this Message
  • SENDER
  • Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message
    Time: 06:34:31 PM PST US
    From: Brian Kenney <brian.kenney@live.ca>
    Subject: A-65
    sure - I am away until early march - any time after I get back 65 are cheaper than almost anything especially if you don't just give it to a professional to spend your money From: born2fly@abcmailbox.net Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: A-65 =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A Hello Brian nice to have you on this forum. I want to come down and=0A go over your plane sometime and take TONS of pictures of a bunch of=0A different spots. I remember the ride in your Piet and it didn't seem=0A bad at all with the 65hp. =0A Regards=2C =0A Charles Burkholder =0A =0A On 1/30/2014 8:38 PM=2C Brian Kenney=0A wrote: =0A =0A =0A =0A Ontario Canada - C-FAUK =0A =0A =0A Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: A-65 =0A From: jack@textors.com =0A Date: Thu=2C 30 Jan 2014 19:28:48 -0600 =0A To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com =0A =0A What Brian said. Well said=2C where you from Brian? =0A =0A Sent from my iPad=0A Jack Textor=0A =0A =0A On Jan 30=2C 2014=2C at 7:10 PM=2C Brian Kenney <brian.kenney@l ive.ca>=0A wrote: =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A hope I am doing this right - my first post =0A =0A I have 26 years flying an A-65 in my Piet. It is nearly=0A the perfect engine for the air camper. I weight over 200=0A lbs and I have taken three different passengers that=0A weigh about 250 lbs. It fly's that weight no problem but=0A my empty weight is around 600Lbs. Realize that a 65 and=0A a 75 are virtually identical and you can have anything=0A between 65 and 75 hp with a different prop. The prop is=0A critical. There is no such thing as a cruise prop for=0A this application. If you are not achieving redline in=0A climb you actually have a smaller engine then you think.=0A I run my A-65 as an A-70 horsepower without any=0A modification by letting it rev higher than 2300 rpm. The=0A engine map in the manual will show you how. =0A =0A There are good reasons to use a C-85 or 0-200 - the main=0A is the engine weight - the A-65 is too light for some=0A completed air campers that are built tail heavy. It=0A makes a poor airplane if you end up with nose that is=0A too long or a wing that is too far aft or both. The=0A option is then there of adding accessories like a=0A starter=2C battery and/or a generator to solve a cg=0A problem. =0A =0A weight is critical with horsepower and the power helps=0A compensate for a heaver and over equipped airplane. =0A =0A where you live is also important. the higher the airport=0A the more you will want power. The hotter it is the same=0A applies. =0A =0A remember is you don't want to prop then don't use a=0A A-65. =0A =0A the cylinders on a c-85 or 0-200 are more durable and=0A are easier to get. =0A =0A I love mine - I am good with it. I am working on making=0A a A-65 into a 85 horsepower with adding c-85 cylinders -=0A this can be done but you have to investigate this and=0A draw your own conclusions. =0A =0A brian kenney =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A > Date: Thu=2C 30 Jan 2014 18:39:59 -0500 =0A > From: born2fly@abcmailbox.net =0A > To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com =0A > Subject: Pietenpol-List: A-65 =0A > =0A Burkholder <born2fly@abcmailbox.net> =0A > =0A > Hi guys=2C =0A > I have an opportunity to buy a newly overhauled=0A Continental A-65 for a =0A > reasonable price. It's been redone by an expert=0A that knows how to =0A > rebuild an engine blindfolded and with one hand=0A tied behind his back. =0A > Except he's very vocal that I will regret putting=0A such a small engine in =0A > and that I should put a O-200 on=2C at the least.=0A Maybe even a 125 hp.... =0A > I'm wondering if anybody can give me performance=0A reports for the A-65=2C =0A > 85 and O-200. Takeoff=2C Feet per minute and cruise=0A etc..... =0A > I learned how to fly behind a 65 and sure=2C you do=0A takeoff a few seconds =0A > later then normal. But then again nobody builds a=0A Piet to get anywhere = Archive Search & Download=2C=0A 7-Day Browse=2C Chat=2C FAQ=2C =0A &g= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-Li st =0A > ================== ===== =0A > =0A > =0A > =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A ===========0A >http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List=0A ===========0A cs.com=0A ===========0A matronics.com/contribution=0A ===========0A =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A ============0A st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List=0A ============0A http://forums.matronics.com=0A ============0A ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution=0A ============0A =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A ============0A ============0A ============0A ============0A =0A




    Other Matronics Email List Services

  • Post A New Message
  •   pietenpol-list@matronics.com
  • UN/SUBSCRIBE
  •   http://www.matronics.com/subscription
  • List FAQ
  •   http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/Pietenpol-List.htm
  • Web Forum Interface To Lists
  •   http://forums.matronics.com
  • Matronics List Wiki
  •   http://wiki.matronics.com
  • 7-Day List Browse
  •   http://www.matronics.com/browse/pietenpol-list
  • Browse Pietenpol-List Digests
  •   http://www.matronics.com/digest/pietenpol-list
  • Browse Other Lists
  •   http://www.matronics.com/browse
  • Live Online Chat!
  •   http://www.matronics.com/chat
  • Archive Downloading
  •   http://www.matronics.com/archives
  • Photo Share
  •   http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
  • Other Email Lists
  •   http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
  • Contributions
  •   http://www.matronics.com/contribution

    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! --