Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:45 PM - Re: Initial biuld decisions (Charlie England)
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: Initial biuld decisions |
Michael D. Cencula wrote:
>
> I've been wondering some of the same things as Rafael, but would like to add
> one more question:
>
> When selecting an engine, does the choice of fixed pitch vs CS have any
> bearing on choosing Dynafocal I vs. Dynafocal II?
>
> I read a posting on this list that indicated Dynafocal II was intended for CS
> props. The argument was that the center of mass is further forward on a CS
> installation, so the focus of the mounts is further forward to match that and
> reduce vibration.
>
> Is this actually true? I've been able to find no other info to back this up,
> although I have found quite a few people flying Dynafocal I motors with CS
> props (which would seem to contradict the posting).
>
> The posting is here in case anyone wants to read it:
>
> http://www.matronics.com/searching/getmsg_script.cgi?INDEX=5148244?KEYS=dynafocal_&_engine_&_code?LISTNAME=RV?HITNUMBER=8?SERIAL=07422721769?SHOWBUTTONS=YES
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike Cencula
>
snipped
Dyna II was created for certain twins using extended hub props. I called
Van's tech help a couple of months ago, trying to determine if I could
order my finish kit without a specific engine selected. One thing they
told me was that the type II mount is no longer available due to
non-existent demand. You might want to verify that directly with Van's.
Charlie
(anybody with a mid-time x-360x they want to part with?)
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! --
|