Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 08:53 AM - Re: James Cowling (evmeg@snowcrest.net)
2. 09:16 AM - Re: James Cowling (David Maib)
3. 09:27 AM - Re: James Cowling (Carl Froehlich)
4. 09:48 AM - Re: James Cowling (Deems Davis)
5. 09:53 AM - Re: James Cowling (Deems Davis)
6. 10:43 AM - Hugo Rv10#40456-seats ()
7. 11:02 AM - Hugo Rv10#40456-seats ()
8. 11:19 AM - Engine Mount and Propeller Impacts on Airframe Vibration (Aaron Gleixner)
9. 11:19 AM - Flying RV10 tire wear (David McNeill)
10. 12:02 PM - Re: Engine Mount and Propeller Impacts on Airframe Vibration (Pascal)
11. 12:05 PM - Re: Re: Quickbuild wing and fuse delivery guidance (Pascal)
12. 12:31 PM - Re: Flying RV10 tire wear (Mark Ritter)
13. 01:49 PM - Re: James Cowling (PJ Seipel)
14. 04:17 PM - Re: Engine Mount and Propeller Impacts on Airframe Vibration (Tim Olson)
15. 04:33 PM - Re: Flying RV10 tire wear (Tim Olson)
16. 04:34 PM - Re: James Cowling (evmeg@snowcrest.net)
17. 04:34 PM - Re: James Cowling (evmeg@snowcrest.net)
18. 04:34 PM - Re: James Cowling (evmeg@snowcrest.net)
19. 05:05 PM - Re: James Cowling (Chris Johnston)
20. 05:51 PM - Re: Flying RV10 tire wear (bob.kaufmann)
21. 06:43 PM - Re: Quickbuild wing and fuse delivery guidance (dmaib@mac.com)
22. 11:00 PM - MT 3 blade propeller available for flight testing (LessDragProd@aol.com)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: James Cowling |
Anybody using the James Cowl on their 10 yet? Besides looking a bit
sexier, I am wondering if gives the added benefits of the 2 place
versions. On the smaller airplanes it adds a few knots of speed by
reducing cooling drag. On the 4 place it may also help with the hot tunnel
syndrome as there seems to be some merit in the argument that the airflow
through the cowl is a major part of the problem. At $1200.00 it does not
seem to expensive if it solves problems.....I dont know how much the
standard cowling costs. There is obviously an offset in cost if I just
dont order that with my finish kit. So.....anybody tried it yet?
Cheers...
Evan
---------------------------------------------
This message was sent using SnowCrest WebMail.
http://www.snowcrest.net
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: James Cowling |
I have asked that question a couple of times and have not received
any responses recently. The only one I have heard is flying is
overseas and I have seen no information on the performance.
David Maib
40559
do not archive
On May 6, 2007, at 10:52 AM, evmeg@snowcrest.net wrote:
Anybody using the James Cowl on their 10 yet? Besides looking a bit
sexier, I am wondering if gives the added benefits of the 2 place
versions. On the smaller airplanes it adds a few knots of speed by
reducing cooling drag. On the 4 place it may also help with the hot
tunnel
syndrome as there seems to be some merit in the argument that the
airflow
through the cowl is a major part of the problem. At $1200.00 it does not
seem to expensive if it solves problems.....I dont know how much the
standard cowling costs. There is obviously an offset in cost if I just
dont order that with my finish kit. So.....anybody tried it yet?
Cheers...
Evan
---------------------------------------------
This message was sent using SnowCrest WebMail.
http://www.snowcrest.net
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'm interested in the James Cowl. I sent a note to them however about the
14" spinner required with this cowl. The Hartzell spinner, at $1400, cost
more than the cowl itself. I asked them if they could do a Van's like 14"
fiberglass spinner kit to replace the ridiculously overpriced Hartzell
spinner. They said no.
Carl Froehlich
RV-8A (320 hrs)
RV-10 (wings)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of
evmeg@snowcrest.net
Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2007 11:53 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: James Cowling
Anybody using the James Cowl on their 10 yet? Besides looking a bit
sexier, I am wondering if gives the added benefits of the 2 place
versions. On the smaller airplanes it adds a few knots of speed by
reducing cooling drag. On the 4 place it may also help with the hot tunnel
syndrome as there seems to be some merit in the argument that the airflow
through the cowl is a major part of the problem. At $1200.00 it does not
seem to expensive if it solves problems.....I dont know how much the
standard cowling costs. There is obviously an offset in cost if I just
dont order that with my finish kit. So.....anybody tried it yet?
Cheers...
Evan
---------------------------------------------
This message was sent using SnowCrest WebMail.
http://www.snowcrest.net
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: James Cowling |
There is one RV-10 in Canada that is flying with the James Cowl, but the
owner/builder Davis Corrigan is not active on any of the lists and
hasn't posted any information regarding performance to my knowledge.
Here is a clip from the James Yahoolist:
Hi Will.
I will get you some stats after I get used to this hot rod,I only have
3 hours on it so far and it is a beauty. I want to thank you folks at
James Aircraft you were a pleasure to work with. We were climbing at
2200 feet per minute with full fuel and two adults over 400 total crew
weight. It is very fast compared to my Cherokee pa 140. You can use
any info you want for your web page or for any thing you want use it for.
Cheers
David Corrigan
--------------------------------------
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2007 6:41 PM
Subject: Article for COPA magazine
First RV-10 to fly in Canada takes off in Charlottetown
By
Barry Martin
The first Vans RV-10 to fly in Canada took to the air on January 18,
2007 from the Charlottetown Airport on PEI. After approximately 16
months of building and, much to the delight of Owner and Builder David
Corrigan and co-builder Deryck Hickox, the RV-10 lifted off around
noon in clear skies and light winds, although the temperature was a
little cool, being around minus 5 degrees C. With the IO-540 purring
like a kitten, the RV-10 was through circuit height before reaching
the end of the runway.
Test pilot Glen McLarty took the RV to 4000 feet over the airport to
do the initial tests then headed north of the airport to finish the
first round of tests. In communication with the ground crew, Glen
relayed that the plane flew straight and level even with his hands off
the stick.
The RV-10 is equipped with a Lycoming IO-540 that was rebuilt by
Aerotec in Halifax and has a MT 3 blade propeller up front. The
instrument panel is well equipped with an AF-2500 engine monitor,
Garmin 430, Garmin SL-30, PS Engineering Audio Panel, Garmin GTX 327
Transponder, ATD-300 Traffic Watch and a TruTrak Autopilot. As all the
instruments are electrically run, there is also a back-up battery.
Deems Davis # 406
Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! )
http://deemsrv10.com/
evmeg@snowcrest.net wrote:
>
> Anybody using the James Cowl on their 10 yet? Besides looking a bit
> sexier, I am wondering if gives the added benefits of the 2 place
> versions. On the smaller airplanes it adds a few knots of speed by
> reducing cooling drag. On the 4 place it may also help with the hot tunnel
> syndrome as there seems to be some merit in the argument that the airflow
> through the cowl is a major part of the problem. At $1200.00 it does not
> seem to expensive if it solves problems.....I dont know how much the
> standard cowling costs. There is obviously an offset in cost if I just
> dont order that with my finish kit. So.....anybody tried it yet?
> Cheers...
> Evan
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using SnowCrest WebMail.
> http://www.snowcrest.net
>
>
>
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: James Cowling |
Here's a copy of 2 images that were posted on the James list of the
Canadian RV-10 w/James cowl
Deems Davis # 406
Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! )
http://deemsrv10.com/
>
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: | Hugo Rv10#40456-seats |
Hi all's.
Just recive the seats from Oregon Aero,I will like some opinions,they where able
to meet almost all my designs .Great company,they do all my extras with no extra
charges.
They are really profesionals
Hugo
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: | Hugo Rv10#40456-seats |
Here the pictures ,sorry
Hugo
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: | Engine Mount and Propeller Impacts on Airframe Vibration |
I am at the point of ordering my engine and prop for the RV-10 and need to make
a decision. My RV-8A has an O-360-A1A with Hartzell CS Prop, and the airframe
vibrates in flight more than I would like, so I want to make sure it will be
better on the RV-10. I have three questions that I'm hoping someone can answer:
1) I've heard that Lord engine mounts do a better job of damping vibration than
the mounts that Van's sells in the FWF kit for the IO-540. Anyone have experience
with this on the RV-10? The Lord mounts cost more, but if they improve
vibration, the extra cost would be worth it.
2) Is there any back-to-back data on the Hartzell 2 blade vs MT 3 blade? I saw
Van's comparison, but it wasn't really back-to-back. Do you really loose 5
kts with the MT 3 blade? Does anyone have a subjective feel for the vibration
difference between the two?
3) For those flying the IO-540 with the Hartzell 2 blade, how good or bad is
the vibration level? Do you ever find yourself wishing you had traded the 5 kts
and lower cost for the lower vibration of the MT prop?
Aaron
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Flying RV10 tire wear |
For flying 10s how is the tire wear? If you could supply indicated tire wear
and total time/approx. number of landings between tire changes it would be
helpful. When building my Glastar we followed the book procedure for toe in
and it caused toe in of 3 degrees per wheel which caused significant uneven
tire wear. We were able to fix this by rotating the gear legs slightly and
up sizing the gear retainer bolt. I know that the toe in on the 10 is a
given but it can be changed if the tires are wearing rapidly. That's the
reason for the question. Anyone with significant wear can email me off line
and supply a phone number to talk.
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: Engine Mount and Propeller Impacts on Airframe Vibration |
Aaron;
Great questions! Search in the vansairforce.net forum and the archives
for other answers, but from what I recall since, I myself asked these
questions here is the responses.
Consider getting the blade on your RV-8 balanced, may make a world of
difference.
2) * Is there any back-to-back data on the Hartzell 2 blade vs MT 3
blade?
I followed up with the builder of the 3 blade of this test last year-
here is the fact of the results:
Just because an engine is stamped 310 hp doesn't mean it is producing
that hp. allegedely mine dynoed 310 hp @ 2800 rpm. I don't run it at
2800 rpm. It might even be 350 hp at 3000 rpm. I've limited it to 2700
RPM because that is the propeller limitation. When Van and I flew side
by side at 8,000' and WOT, the fuel flows were within .3 gph and mp was
within .5", so I believe we were actually matched. The factory a/s
indicator read 7 mph faster, but our GPS were within 1 kt of each other.
I have 2 independent a/s indicators and they were equal, and I have had
them calibrated to 20,000. I can always count on 166-170 knots TAS. I
assure you if I were 12 mph slower I wouldn't settle for it.
*Does anyone have a subjective feel for the vibration difference between
the two?
We notice we are not fatigued at the end of the trip as we have been on
our other airplanes over the years (Rv-4, RV-6, Kitfox, Bonanza, C-182).
The only annoyance is getting the lower cowl on and off, but after the
1st 100 hours it doesn't need to come off as much. No regrets here. :)
3) I gather you'll get a whole lot of information on this. Tim olsen has
his blade balanced and I believe he even mentioned why he chose the 2
blade- check out his great site (although as history shows, I guarantee
he'll respond in detail for you anyway) http://www.myrv10.com
My experience, as I was blessed to get a ride in the 3 blade MT RV-10,
is the comfort is far more important to me, (and my family) than any
speed I may get- so I see a 1-2% increase, at 177kts I am quite happy
with a smooth running airplane, and as the builders I have spoken to who
own the 3 blade each comments on the comfort flying and after landing
(in the form of fatique). I just started looking at the plans but I knew
from the start that I was going 3 blade.
What is more important to you? do YOU want that extra few knots or that
extra comfort to maybe go a little further on those cross countrys
without the added fatigue? is your intention to stay local? than 3
blades will get you higher sooner than a 2 blade, and cruise is rather
insignificant in the big scheme of things anyway.
Oh and is cost a factor? more to buy that MT, let alone an Aerocomposite
prop than a Hartzell. So it does come down to is comfort and climbing
performance worth the extra bucks?
Pascal
----- Original Message -----
From: Aaron Gleixner
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2007 11:10 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Engine Mount and Propeller Impacts on Airframe
Vibration
I am at the point of ordering my engine and prop for the RV-10 and
need to make a decision. My RV-8A has an O-360-A1A with Hartzell CS
Prop, and the airframe vibrates in flight more than I would like, so I
want to make sure it will be better on the RV-10. I have three
questions that I'm hoping someone can answer:
1) I've heard that Lord engine mounts do a better job of damping
vibration than the mounts that Van's sells in the FWF kit for the
IO-540. Anyone have experience with this on the RV-10? The Lord mounts
cost more, but if they improve vibration, the extra cost would be worth
it.
2) I saw Van's comparison, but it wasn't really back-to-back. Do
you really loose 5 kts with the MT 3 blade? Does anyone have a
subjective feel for the vibration difference between the two?
3) For those flying the IO-540 with the Hartzell 2 blade, how good or
bad is the vibration level? Do you ever find yourself wishing you had
traded the 5 kts and lower cost for the lower vibration of the MT prop?
Aaron
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: Quickbuild wing and fuse delivery guidance |
bummer!
How does one fix this?
how did it work out?
----- Original Message -----
From: <dmaib@mac.com>
Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2007 12:24 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: Quickbuild wing and fuse delivery guidance
>
> I will echo Kevins comments about the carpet cradle, especially the part
> about fastening the spar to the support so it cannot slip off. Here is
> what happens when it slips off.
>
> David Maib
> 40559
> do not archive
>
> --------
> David Maib
> RV-10 #40559
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=111026#111026
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_0836_482.jpg
>
>
>
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Flying RV10 tire wear |
I have 92 hours on my RV-10 and 87 landings over the last nine months.
Slight wear on outboard side of mains. Will rotate them this summer and
hopefully get another 100+ hours before replacing them.
Mark
N410MR
>From: "David McNeill" <dlm46007@cox.net>
>To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: RV10-List: Flying RV10 tire wear
>Date: Sun, 6 May 2007 11:11:29 -0700
>
>
>For flying 10s how is the tire wear? If you could supply indicated tire
>wear
>and total time/approx. number of landings between tire changes it would be
>helpful. When building my Glastar we followed the book procedure for toe in
>and it caused toe in of 3 degrees per wheel which caused significant uneven
>tire wear. We were able to fix this by rotating the gear legs slightly and
>up sizing the gear retainer bolt. I know that the toe in on the 10 is a
>given but it can be changed if the tires are wearing rapidly. That's the
>reason for the question. Anyone with significant wear can email me off line
>and supply a phone number to talk.
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Get a FREE Web site, company branded e-mail and more from Microsoft Office
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: James Cowling |
I'm waiting on the James cowl that accommodates the Barrett cold air
induction. The last email I got from Will said that they're waiting on
feedback from the few that they've sold before they sell any more.
Hopefully those that have them will be flying soon.
PJ
RV-10 #40032
evmeg@snowcrest.net wrote:
>
> Anybody using the James Cowl on their 10 yet? Besides looking a bit
> sexier, I am wondering if gives the added benefits of the 2 place
> versions. On the smaller airplanes it adds a few knots of speed by
> reducing cooling drag. On the 4 place it may also help with the hot tunnel
> syndrome as there seems to be some merit in the argument that the airflow
> through the cowl is a major part of the problem. At $1200.00 it does not
> seem to expensive if it solves problems.....I dont know how much the
> standard cowling costs. There is obviously an offset in cost if I just
> dont order that with my finish kit. So.....anybody tried it yet?
> Cheers...
> Evan
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using SnowCrest WebMail.
> http://www.snowcrest.net
>
>
>
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine Mount and Propeller Impacts on Airframe Vibration |
A couple things...
Re: #1) I think the mounts that come with the kit ARE Lord mounts.
They seem to be fine.
Re: #2) I don't really see there being a big enough difference in
speed or any other things to matter, depending on your preference.
The two props to have a completely different feel in the airplane
though, but I wouldn't say one is better than the other. I prefer
the lower pitched sound of the two blade to the more high pitched
sound of the 3, although I won't argue that the 3 isn't smooth, because
it's very smooth...it's just different, and it gets to be a personal
preference. Advice...fly in 2 -10's with both props, if you can.
Re: #3) If you take the time for dynamic balancing, you should be
happy with either choice as well. The 6-cylinder engines are far
smoother than the 4-cylinder modesl, so even an IO-540 with a
slightly out of balance prop is probably smoother than most 4's
that you've flown in. If you balance either, then I think either
would make you happy. It's all personal preference, including the
looks, and the relative ease of cowl removal with a 2-blade...to
each, his own.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Aaron Gleixner wrote:
> I am at the point of ordering my engine and prop for the RV-10 and need
> to make a decision. My RV-8A has an O-360-A1A with Hartzell CS Prop,
> and the airframe vibrates in flight more than I would like, so I want to
> make sure it will be better on the RV-10. I have three questions that
> I'm hoping someone can answer:
>
> 1) I've heard that Lord engine mounts do a better job of damping
> vibration than the mounts that Van's sells in the FWF kit for the
> IO-540. Anyone have experience with this on the RV-10? The Lord mounts
> cost more, but if they improve vibration, the extra cost would be worth it.
>
> 2) Is there any back-to-back data on the Hartzell 2 blade vs MT 3
> blade? I saw Van's comparison, but it wasn't really back-to-back. Do
> you really loose 5 kts with the MT 3 blade? Does anyone have a
> subjective feel for the vibration difference between the two?
>
> 3) For those flying the IO-540 with the Hartzell 2 blade, how good or
> bad is the vibration level? Do you ever find yourself wishing you had
> traded the 5 kts and lower cost for the lower vibration of the MT prop?
>
> Aaron
>
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: Flying RV10 tire wear |
Mine had wear on the outer sides, but not to the cords and PLENTY of
tread depth to the rest of the tire, that was at 170 hours and about
200 landings. Flipped them over and there is no noticeable wear
happening to the previously worn, previously outer edges, and it'll
take a long time again to get the *new* outer edges wearing out.
I'm estimating another 100-125 hours left on this set of tires
before I replace them. I had intended to just use them through
the winter when I'd have ice patches on the runway, but right now
I'm thinking I may as well leave the new tires shrink wrapped
and just keep going with these for their lifetime.
Tim
do not archive
Mark Ritter wrote:
>
> I have 92 hours on my RV-10 and 87 landings over the last nine months.
> Slight wear on outboard side of mains. Will rotate them this summer and
> hopefully get another 100+ hours before replacing them.
>
> Mark
> N410MR
>
>
>
>
>> From: "David McNeill" <dlm46007@cox.net>
>> To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: RV10-List: Flying RV10 tire wear
>> Date: Sun, 6 May 2007 11:11:29 -0700
>>
>>
>> For flying 10s how is the tire wear? If you could supply indicated
>> tire wear
>> and total time/approx. number of landings between tire changes it
>> would be
>> helpful. When building my Glastar we followed the book procedure for
>> toe in
>> and it caused toe in of 3 degrees per wheel which caused significant
>> uneven
>> tire wear. We were able to fix this by rotating the gear legs slightly
>> and
>> up sizing the gear retainer bolt. I know that the toe in on the 10 is a
>> given but it can be changed if the tires are wearing rapidly. That's the
>> reason for the question. Anyone with significant wear can email me off
>> line
>> and supply a phone number to talk.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get a FREE Web site, company branded e-mail and more from Microsoft Office
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
>
Really!....I had no idea! thanks for the heads up on that one....Goes to
show you that the rule holds true about deviatiating from the plans...
small change=BIG price difference. There must be a reasonable solution to
this one. Seems too simple to me.
Evan
>
> I'm interested in the James Cowl. I sent a note to them however about the
> 14" spinner required with this cowl. The Hartzell spinner, at $1400, cost
> more than the cowl itself. I asked them if they could do a Van's like 14"
> fiberglass spinner kit to replace the ridiculously overpriced Hartzell
> spinner. They said no.
>
> Carl Froehlich
> RV-8A (320 hrs)
> RV-10 (wings)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of
> evmeg@snowcrest.net
> Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2007 11:53 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: James Cowling
>
>
>
> Anybody using the James Cowl on their 10 yet? Besides looking a bit
> sexier, I am wondering if gives the added benefits of the 2 place
> versions. On the smaller airplanes it adds a few knots of speed by
> reducing cooling drag. On the 4 place it may also help with the hot tunnel
> syndrome as there seems to be some merit in the argument that the airflow
> through the cowl is a major part of the problem. At $1200.00 it does not
> seem to expensive if it solves problems.....I dont know how much the
> standard cowling costs. There is obviously an offset in cost if I just
> dont order that with my finish kit. So.....anybody tried it yet?
> Cheers...
> Evan
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using SnowCrest WebMail.
> http://www.snowcrest.net
>
>
---------------------------------------------
This message was sent using SnowCrest WebMail.
http://www.snowcrest.net
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 |
|
>
Really!....I had no idea! thanks for the heads up on that one....Goes to
show you that the rule holds true about deviatiating from the plans...
small change=BIG price difference. There must be a reasonable solution to
this one. Seems too simple to me.
Evan
>
> I'm interested in the James Cowl. I sent a note to them however about the
> 14" spinner required with this cowl. The Hartzell spinner, at $1400, cost
> more than the cowl itself. I asked them if they could do a Van's like 14"
> fiberglass spinner kit to replace the ridiculously overpriced Hartzell
> spinner. They said no.
>
> Carl Froehlich
> RV-8A (320 hrs)
> RV-10 (wings)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of
> evmeg@snowcrest.net
> Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2007 11:53 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: James Cowling
>
>
>
> Anybody using the James Cowl on their 10 yet? Besides looking a bit
> sexier, I am wondering if gives the added benefits of the 2 place
> versions. On the smaller airplanes it adds a few knots of speed by
> reducing cooling drag. On the 4 place it may also help with the hot tunnel
> syndrome as there seems to be some merit in the argument that the airflow
> through the cowl is a major part of the problem. At $1200.00 it does not
> seem to expensive if it solves problems.....I dont know how much the
> standard cowling costs. There is obviously an offset in cost if I just
> dont order that with my finish kit. So.....anybody tried it yet?
> Cheers...
> Evan
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using SnowCrest WebMail.
> http://www.snowcrest.net
>
>
---------------------------------------------
This message was sent using SnowCrest WebMail.
http://www.snowcrest.net
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 |
|
>
Really!....I had no idea! thanks for the heads up on that one....Goes to
show you that the rule holds true about deviatiating from the plans...
small change=BIG price difference. There must be a reasonable solution to
this one. Seems too simple to me.
Evan
>
> I'm interested in the James Cowl. I sent a note to them however about the
> 14" spinner required with this cowl. The Hartzell spinner, at $1400, cost
> more than the cowl itself. I asked them if they could do a Van's like 14"
> fiberglass spinner kit to replace the ridiculously overpriced Hartzell
> spinner. They said no.
>
> Carl Froehlich
> RV-8A (320 hrs)
> RV-10 (wings)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of
> evmeg@snowcrest.net
> Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2007 11:53 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: James Cowling
>
>
>
> Anybody using the James Cowl on their 10 yet? Besides looking a bit
> sexier, I am wondering if gives the added benefits of the 2 place
> versions. On the smaller airplanes it adds a few knots of speed by
> reducing cooling drag. On the 4 place it may also help with the hot tunnel
> syndrome as there seems to be some merit in the argument that the airflow
> through the cowl is a major part of the problem. At $1200.00 it does not
> seem to expensive if it solves problems.....I dont know how much the
> standard cowling costs. There is obviously an offset in cost if I just
> dont order that with my finish kit. So.....anybody tried it yet?
> Cheers...
> Evan
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using SnowCrest WebMail.
> http://www.snowcrest.net
>
>
---------------------------------------------
This message was sent using SnowCrest WebMail.
http://www.snowcrest.net
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
I bought the james cowl, and ordered the MT 3blade prop with the 14"
spinner, and I'm pretty sure the price for the larger spinner was the
same.
cj
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of
evmeg@snowcrest.net
Sent: Sun 5/6/2007 4:34 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: James Cowling
>
Really!....I had no idea! thanks for the heads up on that one....Goes to
show you that the rule holds true about deviatiating from the plans...
small change=BIG price difference. There must be a reasonable solution
to
this one. Seems too simple to me.
Evan
<carl.froehlich@cox.net>
>
> I'm interested in the James Cowl. I sent a note to them however about
the
> 14" spinner required with this cowl. The Hartzell spinner, at $1400,
cost
> more than the cowl itself. I asked them if they could do a Van's like
14"
> fiberglass spinner kit to replace the ridiculously overpriced Hartzell
> spinner. They said no.
>
> Carl Froehlich
> RV-8A (320 hrs)
> RV-10 (wings)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of
> evmeg@snowcrest.net
> Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2007 11:53 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: James Cowling
>
>
>
> Anybody using the James Cowl on their 10 yet? Besides looking a bit
> sexier, I am wondering if gives the added benefits of the 2 place
> versions. On the smaller airplanes it adds a few knots of speed by
> reducing cooling drag. On the 4 place it may also help with the hot
tunnel
> syndrome as there seems to be some merit in the argument that the
airflow
> through the cowl is a major part of the problem. At $1200.00 it does
not
> seem to expensive if it solves problems.....I dont know how much the
> standard cowling costs. There is obviously an offset in cost if I just
> dont order that with my finish kit. So.....anybody tried it yet?
> Cheers...
> Evan
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using SnowCrest WebMail.
> http://www.snowcrest.net
>
>
---------------------------------------------
This message was sent using SnowCrest WebMail.
http://www.snowcrest.net
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Flying RV10 tire wear |
I have 300 hours and 375 landings on tires and am about to switch them to
get wear on the other sides.
Bob K
Do not archive
All of those hours and landings are in my mind of course.
91/09 and counting
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2007 3:32 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Flying RV10 tire wear
Mine had wear on the outer sides, but not to the cords and PLENTY of
tread depth to the rest of the tire, that was at 170 hours and about
200 landings. Flipped them over and there is no noticeable wear
happening to the previously worn, previously outer edges, and it'll
take a long time again to get the *new* outer edges wearing out.
I'm estimating another 100-125 hours left on this set of tires
before I replace them. I had intended to just use them through
the winter when I'd have ice patches on the runway, but right now
I'm thinking I may as well leave the new tires shrink wrapped
and just keep going with these for their lifetime.
Tim
do not archive
Mark Ritter wrote:
>
> I have 92 hours on my RV-10 and 87 landings over the last nine months.
> Slight wear on outboard side of mains. Will rotate them this summer and
> hopefully get another 100+ hours before replacing them.
>
> Mark
> N410MR
>
>
>
>
>> From: "David McNeill" <dlm46007@cox.net>
>> To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: RV10-List: Flying RV10 tire wear
>> Date: Sun, 6 May 2007 11:11:29 -0700
>>
>>
>> For flying 10s how is the tire wear? If you could supply indicated
>> tire wear
>> and total time/approx. number of landings between tire changes it
>> would be
>> helpful. When building my Glastar we followed the book procedure for
>> toe in
>> and it caused toe in of 3 degrees per wheel which caused significant
>> uneven
>> tire wear. We were able to fix this by rotating the gear legs slightly
>> and
>> up sizing the gear retainer bolt. I know that the toe in on the 10 is a
>> given but it can be changed if the tires are wearing rapidly. That's the
>> reason for the question. Anyone with significant wear can email me off
>> line
>> and supply a phone number to talk.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get a FREE Web site, company branded e-mail and more from Microsoft Office
>
>
>
>
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Quickbuild wing and fuse delivery guidance |
I found a gentleman that rebuilds warbirds. He patiently and carefully coaxed the
leading edge and rib back into shape. He inspected both areas for damage and
was satisfied. Re-sealed with proseal, and charged me a whopping $40!
--------
David Maib
RV-10 #40559
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=111245#111245
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_1272_126.jpg
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | MT 3 blade propeller available for flight testing |
Hi All,
If anyone flying a RV-10 with a Hartzell propeller is interested in trying
the 3 blade MT propeller, I have one available.
MT Propeller does not own this propeller. I own the RV-10 MT propeller. I
have both a 13" diameter spinner, and a 14" diameter spinner for this
propeller.
The propeller is available at the Oxnard Airport (OXR) in Oxnard,
California. NW of Los Angeles, CA.
Also, if someone with a Hartzell 2 blade is interested in doing some cruise
performance comparison flight testing, I would be willing to work with you to
make it happen. The initial testing would be with your Hartzell propeller
on your aircraft in its present configuration.
The 3 Blade MT Propeller will be a direct bolt on installation for a cowl
with the standard 1 1/2" cowl spacing.
Jim Ayers
Less Drag Products, Inc.
(805) 795-5377 (8 am to 8 pm PDT)
************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
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! --
|