Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:31 AM - Re: ALTITUDE HOLDER ALTRAC (Dana Overall)
2. 05:44 AM - Re: Fuel System PIAs (Don)
3. 07:00 AM - Re: RV-7 or RV-9 ?RV-7 or RV-9 ? (Doc Custer)
4. 07:11 AM - Re: RV-7 or RV-9 ?RV-7 or RV-9 ? (Jim Sears)
5. 09:28 AM - Re: RV-7 or RV-9 ?RV-7 or RV-9 ? (Rob Prior (rv7))
6. 12:19 PM - Re: Unusual ring gear tooth wear (Morocketman@aol.com)
7. 01:34 PM - SportAir Workshop in Watsonville, CA (Dave Saylor)
8. 01:37 PM - Re: Unusual ring gear tooth wear (Bob J.)
9. 03:24 PM - Matching Paint (Duane Bentley)
10. 03:27 PM - Re: RV-7 or RV-9 ?RV-7 or RV-9 ? (Hopperdhh@aol.com)
11. 03:47 PM - Re: RV-7 or RV-9 ?RV-7 or RV-9 ? (Hopperdhh@aol.com)
12. 05:46 PM - Re: Matching Paint (Bill Schlatterer)
13. 06:13 PM - Re: Matching Paint (Bill Schlatterer)
14. 06:14 PM - Adel clamps on engine bolts (Pam & Tom Brink)
15. 07:35 PM - Re: RV-7 or RV-9 ?RV-7 or RV-9 ? (Fiveonepw@aol.com)
16. 07:49 PM - Fit of front edge of rear tip-up canopy window to front window (John Goldsmith)
17. 08:33 PM - Re: Fit of front edge of rear tip-up canopy window to front window (William Gill)
18. 10:09 PM - Re: Unusual ring gear tooth wear (HCRV6@comcast.net)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: ALTITUDE HOLDER ALTRAC |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Dana Overall" <bo124rs@hotmail.com>
Albert, I did see Sam's post about Trio also being able to serve as a "mere"
wing leveler. Since I have been doing some serious studying, here is quick
update. Upon power up it goes to TRK mode, if it gets no GPS it flashes NO
GPS and you use the L-R switch to initiate turns. So yes, as Sam said, it
is a wing leveler and does so automatically if no GPS data is available.
Dana Overall
Richmond, KY i39
RV-7 slider, Imron black, "Black Magic"
O 360 A1A, C/S C2YK-1BF/F7666A4
http://rvflying.tripod.com/id30.html
do not archive
_________________________________________________________________
Get the new Windows Live Messenger!
http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=wlmailtagline
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: Fuel System PIAs |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Don" <airflow2@bellsouth.net>
You have a lot of questions here. First with out seeing your installation with
the exhaust system installed I dont know about this interference problem with
the metered fuel hose. But if you e-mailed me a picture Im sure we could resolve
this problem easily. You might require a different hose than the one you
have. So if you have additional questions on this give me a call.
The mechanical fuel pump outlet problem is a new one. Or at least no one has called
me on this problem yet. Theres no problem with repositioning the fuel outlet
fitting on the pump so the hose will not interfere with the engine mount.
There should be enough hose to do that. There again, a special hose might
be needed for your application.
There is no need to connect the boost pump and engine driven pump in parallel.
This only creates more plumbing, connections and additional check valves in the
system. Hook the boost pump and engine driven pump in series. Theres no problem
with this installation and its done on most certified installations.
Keep the metered fuel lines short as possible. I have done installations where
the hoses support the Flowscan unit. Theres no need to run the hoses back to
the engine mount or fire wall then up to the purge valve inlet. We have done
installations where the hose coming out of the fuel control is 3-4 inches long,
attaches to the Flowscan unit and the hose goes directly to the purge valve
inlet. The hoses support the Flowscan unit. We firesleeve the Flowscan unit
after the hoses are connected. This has worked well so far. I have probably
done this at least 6 times this way.
If you have specific questions about your Airflow Performance fuel injection system,
please dont hesitate to give us a call or e-mail.
Don
airflow2@bellsouth.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=57204#57204
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: RV-7 or RV-9 ?RV-7 or RV-9 ? |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Doc Custer" <ddcuster@wmv-co.us>
The 7 is a heavy plane -- stressed for aerobatics. The 9 is much lighter and
has a modern wing while the 7 uses an old NACA airfoil. The 9 is thus more
efficient: Less weight, better wing.
Still -- it all depends on the mission. Ask the guys at Vans who fly long
distance cross country which plane they would rather take. I did. The
agreement was unanimous -- take the 9 for cross country.
If you want to be upside down go with the 7.
Simple. Just look at Van's design goals with both the 7 and the 9. Van's
designs are very successful based on which mission is going to be flown. If
you get a plane designed for one mission and fly it on different missions
regularly you are not going to be as satisfied as the guy who flies the
plane on the mission for which it was designed.
Doc
----- Original Message -----
From: <rv6@grandecom.net>
Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 4:42 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: RV-7 or RV-9 ?RV-7 or RV-9 ?
> --> RV-List message posted by: rv6@grandecom.net
>
> Quoting Hopperdhh@aol.com:
>
> Well said.
>
>
>>
>> In a message dated 8/24/2006 7:47:25 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
>> KBelue@drs-tem.com writes:
>>
>> In my experience, an RV-x with 160hp and an RV-x with 180hp flying
>> together
>> at the same speed (both with the same prop: fixed pitch or CS, and both
>> with
>> the same induction: carb. or FI) consume almost exactly the same amount
>> of
>> fuel. The only variance seems to be the amount one might be able to lean
>> over
>> the other. If they both fly @ 75% power, the 180hp uses more fuel, but
>> is
>> going faster (~10 mph).
>>
>> Kevin D. Belue
>> RV-6A 700hrs.
>> RV-10 finish
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I would think that the lower weight would give an advantage to the O-320
>> powered ship.
>>
>> Dan Hopper
>> RV-7A 200 HP wishing it were lighter
>>
>>
>
>
>
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: RV-7 or RV-9 ?RV-7 or RV-9 ? |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Sears" <jmsears@adelphia.net>
Well, the -9A may be lighter by design; but, I built a RV-6A and helped to
build a -9A. Amazingly, the two were within a couple of pounds of each
other in weight. Both were similarly equiped with power, prop, etc. I
think the -7A is pretty close to that, as well. In fact, I'm still not sure
why Van removed the 150hp engine from their list of powerplants for the -7x
unless it was the fact that they don't sell them. As for the mission, I
agree. I must say that my little -6A with 150hp engine isn't too bad on
cross countries. I fly VFR, though.
Anyway, the fellow who asked the original question to the thread has already
decided to build a -7x; so, I guess this discussion could probably end.
Jim Sears in KY
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Doc Custer" <ddcuster@wmv-co.us>
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2006 9:59 AM
Subject: Re: RV-List: RV-7 or RV-9 ?RV-7 or RV-9 ?
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Doc Custer" <ddcuster@wmv-co.us>
>
> The 7 is a heavy plane -- stressed for aerobatics. The 9 is much lighter
> and has a modern wing while the 7 uses an old NACA airfoil. The 9 is thus
> more efficient: Less weight, better wing.
>
> Still -- it all depends on the mission. Ask the guys at Vans who fly long
> distance cross country which plane they would rather take. I did. The
> agreement was unanimous -- take the 9 for cross country.
>
> If you want to be upside down go with the 7.
>
> Simple. Just look at Van's design goals with both the 7 and the 9. Van's
> designs are very successful based on which mission is going to be flown.
> If you get a plane designed for one mission and fly it on different
> missions regularly you are not going to be as satisfied as the guy who
> flies the plane on the mission for which it was designed.
>
> Doc
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <rv6@grandecom.net>
> To: <rv-list@matronics.com>; <Hopperdhh@aol.com>
> Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 4:42 PM
> Subject: Re: RV-List: RV-7 or RV-9 ?RV-7 or RV-9 ?
>
>
>> --> RV-List message posted by: rv6@grandecom.net
>>
>> Quoting Hopperdhh@aol.com:
>>
>> Well said.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> In a message dated 8/24/2006 7:47:25 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
>>> KBelue@drs-tem.com writes:
>>>
>>> In my experience, an RV-x with 160hp and an RV-x with 180hp flying
>>> together
>>> at the same speed (both with the same prop: fixed pitch or CS, and both
>>> with
>>> the same induction: carb. or FI) consume almost exactly the same amount
>>> of
>>> fuel. The only variance seems to be the amount one might be able to
>>> lean
>>> over
>>> the other. If they both fly @ 75% power, the 180hp uses more fuel, but
>>> is
>>> going faster (~10 mph).
>>>
>>> Kevin D. Belue
>>> RV-6A 700hrs.
>>> RV-10 finish
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I would think that the lower weight would give an advantage to the O-320
>>> powered ship.
>>>
>>> Dan Hopper
>>> RV-7A 200 HP wishing it were lighter
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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: RV-7 or RV-9 ?RV-7 or RV-9 ? |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Rob Prior (rv7)" <rv7@b4.ca>
On 6:59:10 2006-08-25 "Doc Custer" <ddcuster@wmv-co.us> wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Doc Custer" <ddcuster@wmv-co.us>
>
> The 7 is a heavy plane -- stressed for aerobatics. The 9 is much
> lighter and has a modern wing while the 7 uses an old NACA airfoil.
> The 9 is thus more efficient: Less weight, better wing.
>From the Van's website:
RV-9
Empty Weight 1015 - 1057 lbs
Gross Weight 1600 - 1750 lbs
RV-7
Empty Weight 1061 - 1114 lbs
Gross Weight 1800 lbs
I don't think it's safe to say that the -7 is a "heavy" plane compared to
the -9. AFter all, it uses the same fuselage, and probably the same gear
and engine mount. The only difference is the horizontal stab and the wing.
Beyond that, your choice of engine and avionics will determine your empty
weight more than your choice of airframe.
> If you want to be upside down go with the 7.
That was my criteria. :)
-Rob
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: Unusual ring gear tooth wear |
Call Les at Skytec. He is wonderful to work with, and has all the knowledge
you will need. Doesn't sound good to me. Les Featherston MO Rocketman
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: | SportAir Workshop in Watsonville, CA |
Listers,
I'm taking an informal head count to see if there is sufficient interest in
a 2 day SportAir RV builder's workshop to be held early November 2006 at
Watsonville Airport (WVI).
Interested parties please contact me off list:
Dave Saylor
AirCrafters LLC
140 Aviation Way
Watsonville, CA
831-722-9141
www.AirCraftersLLC.com
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Unusual ring gear tooth wear |
This is a problem I've seen with Sky-Tec starters on at least three
occasions, not enough ring gear engagement. If you call them of course it
won't be their fault. Once you can't get the thing to crank over the first
compression, then they'll blame the engine manufacturer, then your wiring,
your battery, your solenoid, your mother, etc. I used to poo-poo B&C's
because of the cost until I did some horsetrading and got one on a trade.
Now without question I believe that it is the best starter, with the new
Sky-Tec high-torque starter in close second. They're both about the same
price ($550). The B&C is geared slightly taller which helps it overcome the
first compression stroke with ease, just a little bit better (but slower)
than the high-torque inline starter from Sky-Tec, but not by much. A friend
and I did testing on his F1 of three different starters (Sky-Tec Flyweight,
my B&C, and the Sky-Tec high torque model). The Flyweight's planetary
gearing (which is plastic!) can only be rebuilt by them; as far as cranking
performance goes it was in dead-last place. One big advantage of the B&C is
that it is rebuildable by your local starter shop. I rebuilt the used one I
got to like new condition for $38.00. BTW the better two of the three
starters fully engaged the ring gear.
Regards,
Bob Japundza
RV-6 flying F1 under const.
On 8/25/06, HCRV6@comcast.net <HCRV6@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> Engine Gurus,
>
> I have about 255 hours total time on my factory new O-360A1A and have
> noticed that the wear pattern on the flywheel ring gear looks as if the
> starter gear is engaging only about the top 1/16 inch or less of each ring
> gear tooth. Also it looks as if the teeth on the ring gear are wearing
> slightly rounded, with slightly more wear on the aft part. The engine was
> delivered from Van's with a Sky-Tec starter that otherwise seems to work
> great and really spins up the engine on startup.
>
> Can anyone comment on this type of ring gear wear pattern as to whether it
> is normal or do I have a problem developing? Also, it possible that my
> starter could have the wrong tooth size for the ring gear and have been
> operating reasonably well for this many hours?
>
> Appreciate any thoughts on this.
> --
> Harry Crosby
> RV-6 N16CX, 254 hours
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
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 |
|
I had my RV6 painted by James Barnhart at Air Colors, Urbana, OH in
November 2004. He did a pretty good job, but unfortunately went out of
business and disappeared with no forwarding address in October 2005. At
the time he painted my plane, I had picked out the colors I wanted from
the Sherwin Williams chart, and gave him those numbers. He asked if he
could use PPG, could match my colors, and he preferred their system. I
said okay, but unfortunately he never provided the PPG paint spec
numbers back to me in either the contract or the final invoice. I never
thought about it at the time.
I recently asked a buddy who has painted autos professionally for years
if he could touch up a few scratches now on my plane. He contacted PPG
who said they didn't have a direct cross reference to the SW colors,
apparently having a larger number of color tints that SW. They
remembered James and the "great records" he kept and couldn't understand
why I didn't have the specs for my plane.
So here I am. If anyone knows where James Barnhart has surfaced in the
country and can get a message to him, I'm not trying to hold him to the
warranty, but I really need the paint specs for my plane.
If anyone else has an idea on how to match it without buying eight
different gallons of paint, I would appreciate it.
Duane Bentley
RV6
N515DB
190 hrs and flying well
West Chester, OH
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: RV-7 or RV-9 ?RV-7 or RV-9 ? |
Doc,
Pretty sure the -7 and -9 have exactly the same fuselage, except for where
the wing brackets are for mounting the front of the wing, and possibly some
other very small differences.
The reason the -9 is not aerobatic is mainly because of the longer wings,
and possibly because of a weaker horizontal stab.
Weights are about the same for a given powerplant. I was referring earlier
to the engine being lighter.
Can't speak too much about how the -9 is to fly. I have a friend who has
one, but I haven't flown it from the left seat, and not much from the right
seat. But, I sure do like my -7A for any mission, except aerial photography.
I
can't imagine a better 2 place airplane.
Dan Hopper
RV-7A
In a message dated 8/25/2006 10:02:21 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
ddcuster@wmv-co.us writes:
--> RV-List message posted by: "Doc Custer" <ddcuster@wmv-co.us>
The 7 is a heavy plane -- stressed for aerobatics. The 9 is much lighter and
has a modern wing while the 7 uses an old NACA airfoil. The 9 is thus more
efficient: Less weight, better wing.
Still -- it all depends on the mission. Ask the guys at Vans who fly long
distance cross country which plane they would rather take. I did. The
agreement was unanimous -- take the 9 for cross country.
If you want to be upside down go with the 7.
Simple. Just look at Van's design goals with both the 7 and the 9. Van's
designs are very successful based on which mission is going to be flown. If
you get a plane designed for one mission and fly it on different missions
regularly you are not going to be as satisfied as the guy who flies the
plane on the mission for which it was designed.
Doc
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: RV-7 or RV-9 ?RV-7 or RV-9 ? |
In a message dated 8/24/2006 8:47:14 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
khorton01@rogers.com writes:
I would think that the lower weight would give an advantage to the O-320
powered ship.
The speed change for a 10 to 20 lb weight reduction is negligible, as the
vast majority of the drag at cruise speeds is profile drag, and it does not
vary with weight. The induced drag, which does vary with the square of weight,
is less than 15% of the total drag at typical cruise speeds (data from the
CAFE Foundation APR on the RV-6A) . The CAFE foundation data suggests that it
would take about a 100 lb weight reduction to realize a 1 mph speed increase,
assuming everything else was equal.
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
Kevin,
The weight difference between a plane with a 200 HP angle valve IO-360 with
a constant speed prop and a O-320 with a wood prop would probably be close to
100 pounds. I'm glad to hear that even 100 pounds is not too significant.
I would still like to experience a really light RV-7A. Too bad it is soooooo
much work to change engines!
Dan Hopper
RV-7A 200 HP
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 |
|
Not much of a problem if you're close to town. DuPont and PPG both make a
device, I think DuPont's is called Chroma-Vision that you carry out to the
car and it analyzes the paint color and then creates a formula to match that
color. Call any place that specializes in automotive paint finishes and you
should be fine. Look for a DuPont or PPG distributor. They will have to go
to the plane to match it up unless you can bring a panel or something
similar to their place of business. Let me know if you need more info.
They will probably expect that you buy the paint from them ;-)
Bill S
7a wiring/engine
_____
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Duane Bentley
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2006 5:24 PM
Subject: RV-List: Matching Paint
I had my RV6 painted by James Barnhart at Air Colors, Urbana, OH in November
2004. He did a pretty good job, but unfortunately went out of business and
disappeared with no forwarding address in October 2005. At the time he
painted my plane, I had picked out the colors I wanted from the Sherwin
Williams chart, and gave him those numbers. He asked if he could use PPG,
could match my colors, and he preferred their system. I said okay, but
unfortunately he never provided the PPG paint spec numbers back to me in
either the contract or the final invoice. I never thought about it at the
time.
I recently asked a buddy who has painted autos professionally for years if
he could touch up a few scratches now on my plane. He contacted PPG who
said they didn't have a direct cross reference to the SW colors, apparently
having a larger number of color tints that SW. They remembered James and
the "great records" he kept and couldn't understand why I didn't have the
specs for my plane.
So here I am. If anyone knows where James Barnhart has surfaced in the
country and can get a message to him, I'm not trying to hold him to the
warranty, but I really need the paint specs for my plane.
If anyone else has an idea on how to match it without buying eight different
gallons of paint, I would appreciate it.
Duane Bentley
RV6
N515DB
190 hrs and flying well
West Chester, OH
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 |
|
This is a link for a little more information on the color match system.
Should be able to match the PPG with DuPont if you can't find a PPG
distributor.
http://www.performancecoatings.dupont.com/dpc/en/us/html/color/daf/doc/chvis
n_prod_guide.html
Bill S
_____
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Schlatterer
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2006 7:46 PM
Subject: RE: RV-List: Matching Paint
Not much of a problem if you're close to town. DuPont and PPG both make a
device, I think DuPont's is called Chroma-Vision that you carry out to the
car and it analyzes the paint color and then creates a formula to match that
color. Call any place that specializes in automotive paint finishes and you
should be fine. Look for a DuPont or PPG distributor. They will have to go
to the plane to match it up unless you can bring a panel or something
similar to their place of business. Let me know if you need more info.
They will probably expect that you buy the paint from them ;-)
Bill S
7a wiring/engine
_____
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Duane Bentley
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2006 5:24 PM
Subject: RV-List: Matching Paint
I had my RV6 painted by James Barnhart at Air Colors, Urbana, OH in November
2004. He did a pretty good job, but unfortunately went out of business and
disappeared with no forwarding address in October 2005. At the time he
painted my plane, I had picked out the colors I wanted from the Sherwin
Williams chart, and gave him those numbers. He asked if he could use PPG,
could match my colors, and he preferred their system. I said okay, but
unfortunately he never provided the PPG paint spec numbers back to me in
either the contract or the final invoice. I never thought about it at the
time.
I recently asked a buddy who has painted autos professionally for years if
he could touch up a few scratches now on my plane. He contacted PPG who
said they didn't have a direct cross reference to the SW colors, apparently
having a larger number of color tints that SW. They remembered James and
the "great records" he kept and couldn't understand why I didn't have the
specs for my plane.
So here I am. If anyone knows where James Barnhart has surfaced in the
country and can get a message to him, I'm not trying to hold him to the
warranty, but I really need the paint specs for my plane.
If anyone else has an idea on how to match it without buying eight different
gallons of paint, I would appreciate it.
Duane Bentley
RV6
N515DB
190 hrs and flying well
West Chester, OH
com/Navigator?RV-List
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: | Adel clamps on engine bolts |
The MS21333 clamps can be had in with several sizes of mounting holes.
see http://www.gen-aircraft-hardware.com/images/pdf/ms21333.pdf for
reference.
Tom Brink RV6 s/n 25416
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: RV-7 or RV-9 ?RV-7 or RV-9 ? |
In a message dated 08/25/2006 9:13:21 AM Central Daylight Time,
jmsears@adelphia.net writes:
I must say that my little -6A with 150hp engine isn't too bad on
cross countries.
>> Yaaaa Jim- been crossing the country for some time in mine and I couldn't
agree more! X-amples: either OSH or LAL to SYI (home base near Nashville) in
about 4 hours, non-stop, less than 25 gallons! Sho' 'nuff cain't be-atch
about that! 8-)
Mark do not archive
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: | Fit of front edge of rear tip-up canopy window to front window |
I finally got around to positioning the rear (tip-up) canopy window of my RV-7A
(skin clecoed around it in the back), and I find that, with the outer (lowest)
edges just touching the front canopy window, there is about a 1/4" gap between
the window pieces at the top center. I had not expected to have to trim the
front edge of the rear canopy piece after making the big cut, anticipating that
it would follow the front canopy piece evenly along the roll bar. Have others
found the need to trim the front edge of the rear piece, taking off about
1/4" at the edges, and very little in the center?
John Goldsmith
RV-7A quickbuild finish kit
---------------------------------
Get on board. You're invited to try the new Yahoo! Mail.
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 |
|
| Subject: | Fit of front edge of rear tip-up canopy window to front window |
Yes, the rear window typically requires trimming as you mentioned.1/4"
sounds about right. Just do a little at a time.
Bill
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Goldsmith
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2006 9:49 PM
Subject: RV-List: Fit of front edge of rear tip-up canopy window to
front window
I finally got around to positioning the rear (tip-up) canopy window of
my RV-7A (skin clecoed around it in the back), and I find that, with the
outer (lowest) edges just touching the front canopy window, there is
about a 1/4" gap between the window pieces at the top center. I had not
expected to have to trim the front edge of the rear canopy piece after
making the "big cut," anticipating that it would follow the front canopy
piece evenly along the roll bar. Have others found the need to trim the
front edge of the rear piece, taking off about 1/4" at the edges, and
very little in the center?
John Goldsmith
RV-7A quickbuild finish kit
<mailto:rv-list@matronics.com>
Get on board. You're
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=40791/*http:/advision.webevents.yahoo.com/ma
ilbeta> invited to try the new Yahoo! Mail.
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Unusual ring gear tooth wear |
Thanks Bob, I appreciate the info.
--
Harry Crosby
RV-6 N16CX, 254 hours
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Bob J." <rocketbob@gmail.com>
This is a problem I've seen with Sky-Tec starters on at least three occasions,
not enough ring gear engagement. If you call them of course it won't be their
fault. Once you can't get the thing to crank over the first compression, then
they'll blame the engine manufacturer, then your wiring, your battery, your
solenoid, your mother, etc. I used to poo-poo B&C's because of the cost until
I did some horsetrading and got one on a trade. Now without question I believe
that it is the best starter, with the new Sky-Tec high-torque starter in close
second. They're both about the same price ($550). The B&C is geared slightly
taller which helps it overcome the first compression stroke with ease, just
a little bit better (but slower) than the high-torque inline starter from Sky-Tec,
but not by much. A friend and I did testing on his F1 of three different
starters (Sky-Tec Flyweight, my B&C, and the Sky-Tec high torque model). The
Flyweight's planetary gearing (which is plastic!)
can on
ly be rebuilt by them; as far as cranking performance goes it was in dead-last
place. One big advantage of the B&C is that it is rebuildable by your local starter
shop. I rebuilt the used one I got to like new condition for $38.00.
BTW the better two of the three starters fully engaged the ring gear.
Regards,
Bob Japundza
RV-6 flying F1 under const.
On 8/25/06, HCRV6@comcast.net < HCRV6@comcast.net> wrote:
Engine Gurus,
I have about 255 hours total time on my factory new O-360A1A and have noticed that
the wear pattern on the flywheel ring gear looks as if the starter gear is
engaging only about the top 1/16 inch or less of each ring gear tooth. Also
it looks as if the teeth on the ring gear are wearing slightly rounded, with slightly
more wear on the aft part. The engine was delivered from Van's with a
Sky-Tec starter that otherwise seems to work great and really spins up the engine
on startup.
Can anyone comment on this type of ring gear wear pattern as to whether it is normal
or do I have a problem developing? Also, it possible that my starter could
have the wrong tooth size for the ring gear and have been operating reasonably
well for this many hours?
Appreciate any thoughts on this.
--
Harry Crosby
RV-6 N16CX, 254 hours
the many List utilities such as the Subscriptions page,
ronics.com/Navigator?RV-List" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List
k" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">
http://forums.matronics.com
"return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">
http://wiki.matronics.com
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
<html><body>
<DIV>Thanks Bob, I appreciate the info.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV class=signature id=signature>--<BR>Harry Crosby <BR>RV-6 N16CX, 254 hours</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px
solid">-------------- Original message -------------- <BR>From: "Bob J." <rocketbob@gmail.com>
<BR>This is a problem I've seen with Sky-Tec starters
on at least three occasions, not enough ring gear engagement. If you call
them of course it won't be their fault. Once you can't get the thing
to crank over the first compression, then they'll blame the engine manufacturer,
then your wiring, your battery, your solenoid, your mother, etc. I used
to poo-poo B&C's because of the cost until I did some horsetrading and
got one on a trade. Now without question I believe that it is the best starter,
with the new Sky-Tec high-torque starter in close second. They're
both about the same price ($550). The B&C is geared slightly taller which
helps it overcome the first compression stroke with ease, just a little bit
better (but slower) than the high-torque inline start
er fro
m Sky-Tec, but not by much. A friend and I did testing on his F1 of three
different starters (Sky-Tec Flyweight, my B&C, and the Sky-Tec high torque
model). The Flyweight's planetary gearing (which is plastic!) can only
be rebuilt by them; as far as cranking performance goes it was in dead-last place.
One big advantage of the B&C is that it is rebuildable by your
local starter shop. I rebuilt the used one I got to like new condition
for $38.00. BTW the better two of the three starters fully engaged
the ring gear. <BR><BR>Regards,<BR>Bob Japundza<BR>RV-6 flying F1 under const.<BR><BR>
<DIV><SPAN class=gmail_quote>On 8/25/06, <B class=gmail_sendername><A href="mailto:HCRV6@comcast.net">HCRV6@comcast.net</A></B> <<A href="mailto:HCRV6@comcast.net"> HCRV6@comcast.net</A>> wrote:</SPAN>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;
BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid">
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>Engine Gurus,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I have about 255 hours total time on my factory new O-360A1A and have noticed
that the wear pattern on the flywheel ring gear looks as if the starter gear
is engaging only about the top 1/16 inch or less of each ring gear tooth.
Also it looks as if the teeth on the ring gear are wearing slightly rounded,
with slightly more wear on the aft part. The engine was delivered from
Van's with a Sky-Tec starter that otherwise seems to work great and really
spins up the engine on startup. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Can anyone comment on this type of ring gear wear pattern as to whether it
is normal or do I have a problem developing? Also, it possible that my
starter could have the wrong tooth size for the ring gear and have been operating
reasonably well for this many hours? </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Appreciate any thoughts on this.</DIV>
<DIV>--<BR>Harry Crosby <BR>RV-6 N16CX, 254 hours</DIV><PRE><B><FONT face="courier
new,courier" color=#000000 size=2>
the many List utilities such as the Subscriptions page,
ronics.com/Navigator?RV-List" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List</A>
k" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">
http://forums.matronics.com</A>
"return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">
http://wiki.matronics.com</A>
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.<BR>
_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">http://www.matronics.com/contribution</A>
===========<BR><BR></FONT></B></PRE></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR><PRE><B><FONT
face="courier new,courier" size=2 color000000?>
</B></FONT></PRE></BLOCKQUOTE>
<pre><b><font size=2 color="#000000" face="courier new,courier">
</b></font></pre></body></html>
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! --
|