Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:02 AM - Re: Another RV-10 takes to the air. (Marcus Cooper)
2. 05:42 AM - Re: Another RV-10 takes to the air. (Tim Olson)
3. 09:00 AM - Aviation Related (Robin Marks)
4. 09:18 AM - Re: Aviation Related (Chris Colohan)
5. 10:59 AM - 2006X oil cooler question (Tim Olson)
6. 12:31 PM - Re: 2006X oil cooler question (gary)
7. 01:47 PM - Re: 2006X oil cooler question (Tim Olson)
8. 02:33 PM - Re: 2006X oil cooler question (Robert Brunkenhoefer)
9. 02:34 PM - Re: 2006X oil cooler question (gary)
10. 03:45 PM - Re: Received new engine, questions (Andy Turner)
11. 04:30 PM - Re: Re: Received new engine, questions (Pascal)
12. 04:47 PM - Re: 2006X oil cooler question (Tim Olson)
13. 05:47 PM - Re: 2006X oil cooler question (Rene)
14. 06:03 PM - Re: Received new engine, questions (Jesse Saint)
15. 06:50 PM - Re: Another RV-10 takes to the air. (Rob Kochman)
16. 07:49 PM - Re: Received new engine, questions (rvdave)
17. 08:14 PM - Re: 2006X oil cooler question (Tim Olson)
18. 10:27 PM - Re: 2006X oil cooler question (Robin Marks)
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: Another RV-10 takes to the air. |
Well done David! Congrats and I hope you enjoy the fruits of your labor.
Marcus
do not archive
On Mar 11, 2011, at 11:56 PM, David Leikam wrote:
>
> At about 4pm central standard time at KUES, kit #40496 flew to 4,200 feet for
about 16 minutes. Everything worked and it flew great. #1 cylinder was a bit
hot on climb but settled down after leveling off.
> Man did it feel good to bring the whole project to the final step. Thanks to
everyone on the list who provided me with information and help over the last
5 years. What a ride! See you at Oshkosh.
>
> David Leikam
> RV10
> N89DA
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: Another RV-10 takes to the air. |
Congrats Dave!
You guys don't forget, once you're flying, and especially painted,
shoot me a photo of your plane. It's great to keep the builders
list full of photos so people can see all the RV-10's!
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
do not archive
On 3/11/2011 10:56 PM, David Leikam wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: David Leikam<daveleikam@wi.rr.com>
>
> At about 4pm central standard time at KUES, kit #40496 flew to 4,200 feet for
about 16 minutes. Everything worked and it flew great. #1 cylinder was a bit
hot on climb but settled down after leveling off.
> Man did it feel good to bring the whole project to the final step. Thanks to
everyone on the list who provided me with information and help over the last
5 years. What a ride! See you at Oshkosh.
>
> David Leikam
> RV10
> N89DA
>
>
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: | Aviation Related |
Do Not Archive
[image:
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2011/03/11/world/asia/20110311_japan-slide-YP21/20110311_japan-slide-YP21-jumbo.jpg]
Sendai airport was inundated with cars, trucks, buses and thick mud
deposited over its runways. NHK television transmitted aerial images of
flood waters engulfing the airport, where survivors clustered on the roof of
the main building.
[image:
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2011/03/11/world/asia/20110311_japan-slide-3CTO/20110311_japan-slide-3CTO-jumbo.jpg]
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: Aviation Related |
Those are the first pictures I've seen of airplanes at Sendai.
I notice this airport also has gates (aka, it services airlines). Does
anyone know if any big iron was at the airport when the quake hit? Where
are those planes? Did they manage to scramble them into the air before the
wave hit?
Chris
On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 8:54 AM, Robin Marks <Robin@painttheweb.com> wrote:
> Do Not Archive
>
> [image:
> http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2011/03/11/world/asia/20110311_japan-slide-YP21/20110311_japan-slide-YP21-jumbo.jpg]
>
> Sendai airport was inundated with cars, trucks, buses and thick mud
> deposited over its runways. NHK television transmitted aerial images of
> flood waters engulfing the airport, where survivors clustered on the roof of
> the main building.
>
> [image:
> http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2011/03/11/world/asia/20110311_japan-slide-3CTO/20110311_japan-slide-3CTO-jumbo.jpg]
>
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: | 2006X oil cooler question |
Has anyone actually SWITCHED to the 2006X oil cooler from the standard Aero-Classic
or the Niagara, and actually seen a definite improvement in oil cooling?
>From the cooler body, everything from the machining, stamping, punch engraving,
all parts, and everything else looks identical side-by-side, with the exception
that the 2006X seems to have the thin WWWWWW fins slightly tighter packed
giving about 10 more V's worth per row. All 3 brands of cooler are 13-row coolers,
and while I haven't seen the Niagara and the others side by side, the Aero-Classic
and 2006X even have some of the same stamping marks on the parts....looks
like two letter persons initials.
I don't want comments like "I have this one and it's great"....we're not blindly
cheerleading. I want real hard examples like "I had brand/model X, and when
I switched to Y, I saw a definite decrease (or increase) in oil temps.
I bought the 2006X based on the claims of lowered temps, so I could put the oil
cooler gate valve in and adjust the temps to keep it warm enough in the winter
but cool in the summer....but if I'm not going to see definite changes (lowering)
of temps, I'm not going to install either item. I need real evidence that
there will be a difference, before i install these things, because from a construction
difference, I just don't see it.
Anyone?
Tim
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: | 2006X oil cooler question |
I had the Niagara and switched to the 206x. I saw about a 10 to 15 degree
drop in oil temps. I did not put in their flow splitter thing in front of
the cooler.
Hope that helps.
Gary Specketer
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2011 1:53 PM
Subject: RV10-List: 2006X oil cooler question
Has anyone actually SWITCHED to the 2006X oil cooler from the standard
Aero-Classic or the Niagara, and actually seen a definite improvement in oil
cooling?
>From the cooler body, everything from the machining, stamping, punch
engraving, all parts, and everything else looks identical side-by-side, with
the exception that the 2006X seems to have the thin WWWWWW fins slightly
tighter packed giving about 10 more V's worth per row. All 3 brands of
cooler are 13-row coolers, and while I haven't seen the Niagara and the
others side by side, the Aero-Classic and 2006X even have some of the same
stamping marks on the parts....looks like two letter persons initials.
I don't want comments like "I have this one and it's great"....we're not
blindly cheerleading. I want real hard examples like "I had brand/model X,
and when I switched to Y, I saw a definite decrease (or increase) in oil
temps.
I bought the 2006X based on the claims of lowered temps, so I could put the
oil cooler gate valve in and adjust the temps to keep it warm enough in the
winter but cool in the summer....but if I'm not going to see definite
changes (lowering) of temps, I'm not going to install either item. I need
real evidence that there will be a difference, before i install these
things, because from a construction difference, I just don't see it.
Anyone?
Tim
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 2006X oil cooler question |
Cool. That's the kind of thing I wanted to hear. I just bit the bullet and mounted
mine so I'm crossing my fingers. Did the Niagara look physically the same
pretty much too?
Tim
On Mar 12, 2011, at 2:25 PM, "gary" <speckter@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> I had the Niagara and switched to the 206x. I saw about a 10 to 15 degree
> drop in oil temps. I did not put in their flow splitter thing in front of
> the cooler.
>
> Hope that helps.
>
> Gary Specketer
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
> Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2011 1:53 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RV10-List: 2006X oil cooler question
>
>
> Has anyone actually SWITCHED to the 2006X oil cooler from the standard
> Aero-Classic or the Niagara, and actually seen a definite improvement in oil
> cooling?
>> From the cooler body, everything from the machining, stamping, punch
> engraving, all parts, and everything else looks identical side-by-side, with
> the exception that the 2006X seems to have the thin WWWWWW fins slightly
> tighter packed giving about 10 more V's worth per row. All 3 brands of
> cooler are 13-row coolers, and while I haven't seen the Niagara and the
> others side by side, the Aero-Classic and 2006X even have some of the same
> stamping marks on the parts....looks like two letter persons initials.
>
>
> I don't want comments like "I have this one and it's great"....we're not
> blindly cheerleading. I want real hard examples like "I had brand/model X,
> and when I switched to Y, I saw a definite decrease (or increase) in oil
> temps.
>
> I bought the 2006X based on the claims of lowered temps, so I could put the
> oil cooler gate valve in and adjust the temps to keep it warm enough in the
> winter but cool in the summer....but if I'm not going to see definite
> changes (lowering) of temps, I'm not going to install either item. I need
> real evidence that there will be a difference, before i install these
> things, because from a construction difference, I just don't see it.
>
> Anyone?
> Tim
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: 2006X oil cooler question |
Tim, I was having cooling problems early on and switched. For the last 250 hrs
I have had no cooling troubles. Fwiw robert 661g 325hrs KCRP
Robert Brunkenhoefer
Sent from my Apple iPad
On Mar 12, 2011, at 12:53 PM, Tim Olson <Tim@myrv10.com> wrote:
>
> Has anyone actually SWITCHED to the 2006X oil cooler from the standard Aero-Classic
or the Niagara, and actually seen a definite improvement in oil cooling?
>> From the cooler body, everything from the machining, stamping, punch engraving,
all parts, and everything else looks identical side-by-side, with the exception
that the 2006X seems to have the thin WWWWWW fins slightly tighter packed
giving about 10 more V's worth per row. All 3 brands of cooler are 13-row
coolers, and while I haven't seen the Niagara and the others side by side, the
Aero-Classic and 2006X even have some of the same stamping marks on the parts....looks
like two letter persons initials.
>
> I don't want comments like "I have this one and it's great"....we're not blindly
cheerleading. I want real hard examples like "I had brand/model X, and when
I switched to Y, I saw a definite decrease (or increase) in oil temps.
>
> I bought the 2006X based on the claims of lowered temps, so I could put the oil
cooler gate valve in and adjust the temps to keep it warm enough in the winter
but cool in the summer....but if I'm not going to see definite changes (lowering)
of temps, I'm not going to install either item. I need real evidence
that there will be a difference, before i install these things, because from a
construction difference, I just don't see it.
>
> Anyone?
> Tim
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: | 2006X oil cooler question |
Yup looked the same. I was pissed when I first saw it.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2011 4:43 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: 2006X oil cooler question
Cool. That's the kind of thing I wanted to hear. I just bit the bullet and
mounted mine so I'm crossing my fingers. Did the Niagara look physically
the same pretty much too?
Tim
On Mar 12, 2011, at 2:25 PM, "gary" <speckter@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> I had the Niagara and switched to the 206x. I saw about a 10 to 15 degree
> drop in oil temps. I did not put in their flow splitter thing in front of
> the cooler.
>
> Hope that helps.
>
> Gary Specketer
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
> Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2011 1:53 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RV10-List: 2006X oil cooler question
>
>
> Has anyone actually SWITCHED to the 2006X oil cooler from the standard
> Aero-Classic or the Niagara, and actually seen a definite improvement in
oil
> cooling?
>> From the cooler body, everything from the machining, stamping, punch
> engraving, all parts, and everything else looks identical side-by-side,
with
> the exception that the 2006X seems to have the thin WWWWWW fins slightly
> tighter packed giving about 10 more V's worth per row. All 3 brands of
> cooler are 13-row coolers, and while I haven't seen the Niagara and the
> others side by side, the Aero-Classic and 2006X even have some of the same
> stamping marks on the parts....looks like two letter persons initials.
>
>
> I don't want comments like "I have this one and it's great"....we're not
> blindly cheerleading. I want real hard examples like "I had brand/model
X,
> and when I switched to Y, I saw a definite decrease (or increase) in oil
> temps.
>
> I bought the 2006X based on the claims of lowered temps, so I could put
the
> oil cooler gate valve in and adjust the temps to keep it warm enough in
the
> winter but cool in the summer....but if I'm not going to see definite
> changes (lowering) of temps, I'm not going to install either item. I need
> real evidence that there will be a difference, before i install these
> things, because from a construction difference, I just don't see it.
>
> Anyone?
> Tim
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: Received new engine, questions |
Dave, I don't know the answers to your questions, as you are ahead of me, but I
also have a McCaulley governor, and had assumed it will work. Hopefully someone
can confirm this for us.
--------
Andy Turner
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=333659#333659
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: Received new engine, questions |
If it were me I would see if it fits on the engine. Get the model number and
contact McCauley Product Support at 1-800-621-7767.
-----Original Message-----
From: Andy Turner
Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2011 3:42 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: Received new engine, questions
Dave, I don't know the answers to your questions, as you are ahead of me,
but I also have a McCaulley governor, and had assumed it will work.
Hopefully someone can confirm this for us.
--------
Andy Turner
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=333659#333659
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 2006X oil cooler question |
Super. I have it installed. Will fly it tomorrow and soon have a trip coming so
I'll know for sure after that. If it lives up to the promises, I'll be happy...then
I'll add that controller flap.
Tim
On Mar 12, 2011, at 4:23 PM, Robert Brunkenhoefer <robertbrunk@me.com> wrote:
>
> Tim, I was having cooling problems early on and switched. For the last 250 hrs
I have had no cooling troubles. Fwiw robert 661g 325hrs KCRP
>
> Robert Brunkenhoefer
> Sent from my Apple iPad
>
> On Mar 12, 2011, at 12:53 PM, Tim Olson <Tim@myrv10.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Has anyone actually SWITCHED to the 2006X oil cooler from the standard Aero-Classic
or the Niagara, and actually seen a definite improvement in oil cooling?
>>> From the cooler body, everything from the machining, stamping, punch engraving,
all parts, and everything else looks identical side-by-side, with the exception
that the 2006X seems to have the thin WWWWWW fins slightly tighter packed
giving about 10 more V's worth per row. All 3 brands of cooler are 13-row
coolers, and while I haven't seen the Niagara and the others side by side, the
Aero-Classic and 2006X even have some of the same stamping marks on the parts....looks
like two letter persons initials.
>>
>> I don't want comments like "I have this one and it's great"....we're not blindly
cheerleading. I want real hard examples like "I had brand/model X, and
when I switched to Y, I saw a definite decrease (or increase) in oil temps.
>>
>> I bought the 2006X based on the claims of lowered temps, so I could put the
oil cooler gate valve in and adjust the temps to keep it warm enough in the winter
but cool in the summer....but if I'm not going to see definite changes (lowering)
of temps, I'm not going to install either item. I need real evidence
that there will be a difference, before i install these things, because from
a construction difference, I just don't see it.
>>
>> Anyone?
>> Tim
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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: | 2006X oil cooler question |
Tim, you might be asking a question that is hard to answer in a scientific
manner. Since there are so many variables that could affect the
outcome.........engine break in, baffling improvements, etc. After a trip
to Vegas I decided that I could not live with my oil temperature problem and
replaced the oil cooler. I saw a general oil temperature decrease.....lets
say 10 degrees....on the hot climb outs.
One other point....with the new cooler, I could not get the oil temps up
above 180 in the winter without using the airflow control valve I installed.
This past winter, on Utah cold days.........lets say 20-30f at takeoff....I
have been flying with all the air flow cut off to the oil cooler. Max oil
temps have been a little over 200f.
Rene'
801-721-6080
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2011 5:44 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: 2006X oil cooler question
Super. I have it installed. Will fly it tomorrow and soon have a trip
coming so I'll know for sure after that. If it lives up to the promises,
I'll be happy...then I'll add that controller flap.
Tim
On Mar 12, 2011, at 4:23 PM, Robert Brunkenhoefer <robertbrunk@me.com>
wrote:
> --> <robertbrunk@me.com>
>
> Tim, I was having cooling problems early on and switched. For the last
> 250 hrs I have had no cooling troubles. Fwiw robert 661g 325hrs KCRP
>
> Robert Brunkenhoefer
> Sent from my Apple iPad
>
> On Mar 12, 2011, at 12:53 PM, Tim Olson <Tim@myrv10.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Has anyone actually SWITCHED to the 2006X oil cooler from the standard
Aero-Classic or the Niagara, and actually seen a definite improvement in oil
cooling?
>>> From the cooler body, everything from the machining, stamping, punch
engraving, all parts, and everything else looks identical side-by-side, with
the exception that the 2006X seems to have the thin WWWWWW fins slightly
tighter packed giving about 10 more V's worth per row. All 3 brands of
cooler are 13-row coolers, and while I haven't seen the Niagara and the
others side by side, the Aero-Classic and 2006X even have some of the same
stamping marks on the parts....looks like two letter persons initials.
>>
>> I don't want comments like "I have this one and it's great"....we're not
blindly cheerleading. I want real hard examples like "I had brand/model X,
and when I switched to Y, I saw a definite decrease (or increase) in oil
temps.
>>
>> I bought the 2006X based on the claims of lowered temps, so I could put
the oil cooler gate valve in and adjust the temps to keep it warm enough in
the winter but cool in the summer....but if I'm not going to see definite
changes (lowering) of temps, I'm not going to install either item. I need
real evidence that there will be a difference, before i install these
things, because from a construction difference, I just don't see it.
>>
>> Anyone?
>> Tim
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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: Received new engine, questions |
The standard angled oil filter adapter from Mattituck does fit the engine mount.
When installing the engine, you need to swing the back of the engine down and
under the engine mount bar, but it does fit with plenty of clearance. It's
much better to change the oil with the angled adapter than with the straight
adapter, which puts the back of the oil filter just aft of flush with the firewall
(sticking into the firewall box just slightly).
I can't speak to the prop governor, as I have only used the MT from Van's, but
I don't see any reason why it wouldn't work. You may need to do some adjustments
as have been necessary with some of the MT's, but that should be all. I'm
no governor expert, however, so you might want to talk to one of those.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
C: 352-427-0285
F: 815-377-3694
On Mar 12, 2011, at 12:41 AM, rvdave wrote:
>
> Received my new Mattituck Red/Gold TMX IO-540, feels great but have some questions.
1) Wondering if there will be a problem with the angled oil filter adaptor
so close to the firewall, 2) I have a McCaulley prop governor I was going
to use on my RV6 but never did, is there any reason I can't use it on this
540 with Hartzell blended airfoil?
>
> --------
> Dave Ford
> RV6 flying
> RV10 building
> Cadillac, MI
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=333593#333593
>
>
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/oil_filter_adaptor_189.jpg
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: Another RV-10 takes to the air. |
Congrats!
On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 5:36 AM, Tim Olson <Tim@myrv10.com> wrote:
>
> Congrats Dave!
> You guys don't forget, once you're flying, and especially painted,
> shoot me a photo of your plane. It's great to keep the builders
> list full of photos so people can see all the RV-10's!
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
> do not archive
>
>
> On 3/11/2011 10:56 PM, David Leikam wrote:
>
>> --> RV10-List message posted by: David Leikam<daveleikam@wi.rr.com>
>>
>> At about 4pm central standard time at KUES, kit #40496 flew to 4,200 feet
>> for about 16 minutes. Everything worked and it flew great. #1 cylinder was
>> a bit hot on climb but settled down after leveling off.
>> Man did it feel good to bring the whole project to the final step. Thanks
>> to everyone on the list who provided me with information and help over the
>> last 5 years. What a ride! See you at Oshkosh.
>>
>> David Leikam
>> RV10
>> N89DA
>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
Rob Kochman
RV-10 "Finishing" Kit
Woodinville, WA (near Seattle)
http://kochman.net/N819K
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: | Re: Received new engine, questions |
Thanks, just the information I was looking for.
--------
Dave Ford
RV6 flying
RV10 building
Cadillac, MI
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=333686#333686
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: | Re: 2006X oil cooler question |
Hi Rene',
I know I couldn't really ask for a real scientific answer on that one.
Not many people would actually swap coolers in one day and go through
all the work to verify an exact drop in temps. I just figured if there
were a handful of people who actually tried both and saw a difference,
I could get a feel for it. That way their break-in, baffling,
and all that doesn't really matter much...what matters is if they
saw lower temps after the new cooler. I also didn't just want
people who have ONLY had that cooler to report, because when
you've only used ONE cooler, you don't really have a way know that
you really have any difference. Besides, everything I could read
about it just said that it has "X % greater cooling than similar
sized coolers". That's not very scientific...you'd really need
to specify WHICH coolers. I'm sure there are some really crappy
coolers of similar size out there. But when I saw mine was nearly
identical in construction, I just got worried that I may have
wasted some good dollars. From the few replies so far though,
it sounds like it may actually be a good deal.
I'm right there with you on the airflow control valve. That was
also part of my hangup. I didn't want to install the new cooler
and have my oil be even MORE too cool on the winter days.
As it was, it can get in the high 160's on cold flights. So
I figured if I actually got -10 degrees out of it, I would do it
with the control valve. That way I can do as you do and keep
it optimal.
Which valve did you use? I am very slightly worried that
installing any valve may add a little restriction even at
full-open, but I may just be paranoid there. That's also why
I didn't want to add the valve unless I had the best cooler
I could get. I bought the nonstopaviation.com valve.
So far I did figure out a way to mount it on the cooler
housing itself that would work, but mounting it on the
back of the baffle gives too much interference with my
engine mount for my satisfaction from the looks of it.
Don M, if you're reading this, do you know where I can
get some 4" SCAT tubing in Blue? I thought at one time
you had a source for that. I'm guessing I'd buy 18"
and then could trim it a little.
Tim
On 3/12/2011 7:47 PM, Rene wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Rene"<rene@felker.com>
>
> Tim, you might be asking a question that is hard to answer in a scientific
> manner. Since there are so many variables that could affect the
> outcome.........engine break in, baffling improvements, etc. After a trip
> to Vegas I decided that I could not live with my oil temperature problem and
> replaced the oil cooler. I saw a general oil temperature decrease.....lets
> say 10 degrees....on the hot climb outs.
>
> One other point....with the new cooler, I could not get the oil temps up
> above 180 in the winter without using the airflow control valve I installed.
> This past winter, on Utah cold days.........lets say 20-30f at takeoff....I
> have been flying with all the air flow cut off to the oil cooler. Max oil
> temps have been a little over 200f.
>
> Rene'
> 801-721-6080
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
> Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2011 5:44 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: 2006X oil cooler question
>
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson<Tim@myrv10.com>
>
> Super. I have it installed. Will fly it tomorrow and soon have a trip
> coming so I'll know for sure after that. If it lives up to the promises,
> I'll be happy...then I'll add that controller flap.
> Tim
>
>
> On Mar 12, 2011, at 4:23 PM, Robert Brunkenhoefer<robertbrunk@me.com>
> wrote:
>
>> --> RV10-List message posted by: Robert Brunkenhoefer
>> --> <robertbrunk@me.com>
>>
>> Tim, I was having cooling problems early on and switched. For the last
>> 250 hrs I have had no cooling troubles. Fwiw robert 661g 325hrs KCRP
>>
>> Robert Brunkenhoefer
>> Sent from my Apple iPad
>>
>> On Mar 12, 2011, at 12:53 PM, Tim Olson<Tim@myrv10.com> wrote:
>>
>>> --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson<Tim@myrv10.com>
>>>
>>> Has anyone actually SWITCHED to the 2006X oil cooler from the standard
> Aero-Classic or the Niagara, and actually seen a definite improvement in oil
> cooling?
>>>> From the cooler body, everything from the machining, stamping, punch
> engraving, all parts, and everything else looks identical side-by-side, with
> the exception that the 2006X seems to have the thin WWWWWW fins slightly
> tighter packed giving about 10 more V's worth per row. All 3 brands of
> cooler are 13-row coolers, and while I haven't seen the Niagara and the
> others side by side, the Aero-Classic and 2006X even have some of the same
> stamping marks on the parts....looks like two letter persons initials.
>>>
>>> I don't want comments like "I have this one and it's great"....we're not
> blindly cheerleading. I want real hard examples like "I had brand/model X,
> and when I switched to Y, I saw a definite decrease (or increase) in oil
> temps.
>>>
>>> I bought the 2006X based on the claims of lowered temps, so I could put
> the oil cooler gate valve in and adjust the temps to keep it warm enough in
> the winter but cool in the summer....but if I'm not going to see definite
> changes (lowering) of temps, I'm not going to install either item. I need
> real evidence that there will be a difference, before i install these
> things, because from a construction difference, I just don't see it.
>>>
>>> Anyone?
>>> Tim
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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: | 2006X oil cooler question |
Tim,
I installed the 2008X as you may know so I can't offer any opinion
on your situation other than to let you know we did not see any chance
before/after installing the butterfly valve when the valve is full open.
As for blue aeroduct tubing this is where we purchased ours but it
is in 12' lengths. I think a friend recently told me about a place he
purchases it by the foot. I will email him now. Maybe an answer tomorrow.
http://www.hrpworld.com/googlebase.cfm?key=Aeroduct%20Hose%20-%20Colored%2
02-Ply%20Silicone%20&form_prod_id=3171&action=product
Robin
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2011 8:10 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: 2006X oil cooler question
Hi Rene',
I know I couldn't really ask for a real scientific answer on that one.
Not many people would actually swap coolers in one day and go through
all the work to verify an exact drop in temps. I just figured if there
were a handful of people who actually tried both and saw a difference,
I could get a feel for it. That way their break-in, baffling,
and all that doesn't really matter much...what matters is if they
saw lower temps after the new cooler. I also didn't just want
people who have ONLY had that cooler to report, because when
you've only used ONE cooler, you don't really have a way know that
you really have any difference. Besides, everything I could read
about it just said that it has "X % greater cooling than similar
sized coolers". That's not very scientific...you'd really need
to specify WHICH coolers. I'm sure there are some really crappy
coolers of similar size out there. But when I saw mine was nearly
identical in construction, I just got worried that I may have
wasted some good dollars. From the few replies so far though,
it sounds like it may actually be a good deal.
I'm right there with you on the airflow control valve. That was
also part of my hangup. I didn't want to install the new cooler
and have my oil be even MORE too cool on the winter days.
As it was, it can get in the high 160's on cold flights. So
I figured if I actually got -10 degrees out of it, I would do it
with the control valve. That way I can do as you do and keep
it optimal.
Which valve did you use? I am very slightly worried that
installing any valve may add a little restriction even at
full-open, but I may just be paranoid there. That's also why
I didn't want to add the valve unless I had the best cooler
I could get. I bought the nonstopaviation.com valve.
So far I did figure out a way to mount it on the cooler
housing itself that would work, but mounting it on the
back of the baffle gives too much interference with my
engine mount for my satisfaction from the looks of it.
Don M, if you're reading this, do you know where I can
get some 4" SCAT tubing in Blue? I thought at one time
you had a source for that. I'm guessing I'd buy 18"
and then could trim it a little.
Tim
On 3/12/2011 7:47 PM, Rene wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Rene"<rene@felker.com>
>
> Tim, you might be asking a question that is hard to answer in a
scientific
> manner. Since there are so many variables that could affect the
> outcome.........engine break in, baffling improvements, etc. After a
trip
> to Vegas I decided that I could not live with my oil temperature problem
and
> replaced the oil cooler. I saw a general oil temperature
decrease.....lets
> say 10 degrees....on the hot climb outs.
>
> One other point....with the new cooler, I could not get the oil temps up
> above 180 in the winter without using the airflow control valve I
installed.
> This past winter, on Utah cold days.........lets say 20-30f at
takeoff....I
> have been flying with all the air flow cut off to the oil cooler. Max
oil
> temps have been a little over 200f.
>
> Rene'
> 801-721-6080
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
> Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2011 5:44 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: 2006X oil cooler question
>
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson<Tim@myrv10.com>
>
> Super. I have it installed. Will fly it tomorrow and soon have a trip
> coming so I'll know for sure after that. If it lives up to the
promises,
> I'll be happy...then I'll add that controller flap.
> Tim
>
>
> On Mar 12, 2011, at 4:23 PM, Robert Brunkenhoefer<robertbrunk@me.com>
> wrote:
>
>> --> RV10-List message posted by: Robert Brunkenhoefer
>> --> <robertbrunk@me.com>
>>
>> Tim, I was having cooling problems early on and switched. For the last
>> 250 hrs I have had no cooling troubles. Fwiw robert 661g 325hrs KCRP
>>
>> Robert Brunkenhoefer
>> Sent from my Apple iPad
>>
>> On Mar 12, 2011, at 12:53 PM, Tim Olson<Tim@myrv10.com> wrote:
>>
>>> --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson<Tim@myrv10.com>
>>>
>>> Has anyone actually SWITCHED to the 2006X oil cooler from the standard
> Aero-Classic or the Niagara, and actually seen a definite improvement in
oil
> cooling?
>>>> From the cooler body, everything from the machining, stamping, punch
> engraving, all parts, and everything else looks identical side-by-side,
with
> the exception that the 2006X seems to have the thin WWWWWW fins slightly
> tighter packed giving about 10 more V's worth per row. All 3 brands of
> cooler are 13-row coolers, and while I haven't seen the Niagara and the
> others side by side, the Aero-Classic and 2006X even have some of the
same
> stamping marks on the parts....looks like two letter persons initials.
>>>
>>> I don't want comments like "I have this one and it's great"....we're
not
> blindly cheerleading. I want real hard examples like "I had
brand/model X,
> and when I switched to Y, I saw a definite decrease (or increase) in oil
> temps.
>>>
>>> I bought the 2006X based on the claims of lowered temps, so I could
put
> the oil cooler gate valve in and adjust the temps to keep it warm enough
in
> the winter but cool in the summer....but if I'm not going to see
definite
> changes (lowering) of temps, I'm not going to install either item. I
need
> real evidence that there will be a difference, before i install these
> things, because from a construction difference, I just don't see it.
>>>
>>> Anyone?
>>> Tim
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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! --
|