Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:36 AM - Re: IO-360 B1E (180 hp) (Brock Windsor)
2. 03:46 AM - Nose Wheel Shimmy (Tom Quinn)
3. 05:13 AM - Re: Nose Wheel Shimmy (FLYaDIVE)
4. 05:15 AM - Re: Nose Wheel Shimmy (Walt Beaulieu)
5. 05:27 AM - Re: Nose Wheel Shimmy (Walt Beaulieu)
6. 05:30 AM - Re: Project X plane pics (FLYaDIVE)
7. 05:42 AM - Re: New customers plane. Complained his brakes didn't work. (FLYaDIVE)
8. 06:01 AM - Re: Nose Wheel Shimmy (Tom Quinn)
9. 08:10 AM - Re: Nose Wheel Shimmy (Bob Hodo)
10. 10:37 AM - Re: IO-360 B1E (180 hp) (Gary Vogt)
11. 10:38 AM - Re: Nose Wheel Shimmy (Gary Vogt)
12. 10:45 AM - Re: Project X plane pics (Gary Vogt)
13. 10:51 AM - Re: IO-360 B1E (180 hp) (Gary Vogt)
14. 10:54 AM - Re: Project X plane pics (Garner Rice)
15. 11:28 AM - Re: Project X plane pics (Gary Vogt)
16. 12:47 PM - Re: Nose Wheel Shimmy (flyv35b)
17. 12:50 PM - Re: IO-360 B1E (180 hp) (flyv35b)
18. 01:57 PM - Re: Nose Wheel Shimmy (FLYaDIVE)
19. 07:54 PM - Re: IO-360 B1E (180 hp) (Brock Windsor)
20. 07:54 PM - Re: IO-360 B1E (180 hp) (Brock Windsor)
21. 10:14 PM - Re: IO-360 B1E (180 hp) (Gary)
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: IO-360 B1E (180 hp) |
Hey Gary,
=C2-=C2- Why=C2-would you have to derate the power on the 10:1?=C2-
What would it be, an RPM resriction?
=C2-
Brock
--- On Tue, 9/28/10, Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
From: Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM>
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
I just saw this. =C2-
"Why isn=99t a 200hp version of the IO360 an option?=C2- I thought
I heard that someone transplanted an IO360/CS prop out of a Cardinal with g
ood results.=C2- No?
Don"
The 200hp, though it sounds sexy as hell, is a terrible choice for the Tige
r. =C2-
1. =C2-It's 60 lbs heavier.
2. Requires a modified engine mount
3. Requires all new baffles
4. Requires a new airbox and inlet.
5. Is an inch wider
6. Has a narrower detonation margin=C2-
7. Wouldn't be able to fit my cowling on it.
A ported and polished parallel valve engine with 8.5:1 compression ratio wi
ll make 200 hp everyday. =C2-
A stock parallel valve engine with 10:1 compression ratio will make 210 hp.
=C2-Derate that to 180 hp and you have 180 hp to 5,000 + feet.
From: Don Curry <don.curry@inbox.com>
Sent: Mon, September 27, 2010 9:06:11 AM
Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
Why isn=99t a 200hp version of the IO360 an option?=C2- I thought I
heard that someone transplanted an IO360/CS prop out of a Cardinal with go
od results.=C2- No?
Don
=C2-
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-teamgrumman
-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary Vogt
Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2010 7:31 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
=C2-
Option 1: =C2-IO 306 B1E =C2-with a fixed pitch prop. =C2-Simple. =C2
-Easy. =C2-The STC would be very straight forward
=C2-
Option 2: =C2-IO 360 B1E =C2-with a constant speed prop. =C2-More wor
k for the STC. =C2-It's heavier. =C2-But, you'd get a number of benefit
s.
=C2-
Option 3: =C2-IO 360 B1E with 10:1 compression ratio, constant speed prop
, limited by manifold pressure to 180 hp. =C2-Better fuel specifics. =C2
-180 hp to about 5,000 feet. =C2-Getting this STC will be a long proces
s but has a lot more potential.
=C2-
=C2-
=C2-
OK, so, which option do you prefer? =C2-Would you be willing to put a dep
osit down?
=C2-=C2-=C2-http://www.matronics.com/contribution=C2-
Send any screenshot to your friends in seconds...
Works in all emails, instant messengers, blogs, forums and social networks.
Try IM ToolPack at www.imtoolpack.com for FREEhttp://t; http://forums.=
--> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
=0A=0A=0A
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: | Nose Wheel Shimmy |
I'm having nose wheel shimmy issues upon landing. It isn't a problem during
taxi or take off. The nose tire is less than a year old. Any advice on how
to fix this? Thanks!
Tom Quinn
249RR
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: Nose Wheel Shimmy |
Tom:
It is not the age of your tire (more than likely)... It is two items:
1 - The torque on the nose fork - The manual says something like 20 Lbs but
I find it needs to be about 30 to 35 Lbs.
2 - The torque on the axle - The torque should be tight enough to ONLY allo
w
the tire to revolve 1/2 to 1 turn when done by hand with moderate strength.
Pull out the manual and check out the procedures. ALSO when was the last
time the nose fork was off for greasing? I'd bet not in quite a while.
Barry
"Chop'd Liver"
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 6:44 AM, Tom Quinn <quinn_tom@tqiinc.com> wrote:
> I=92m having nose wheel shimmy issues upon landing. It isn=92t a problem
> during taxi or take off. The nose tire is less than a year old. Any advic
e
> on how to fix this? Thanks!
>
>
> Tom Quinn
>
> 249RR
>
> *
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
> *
>
>
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: Nose Wheel Shimmy |
Jack the nose and Use a fish scale, tie it to the center of the wheel and
and measure the amount of pull it take to move the nose wheel. I keep mine
up around 20 lbs. Books says 12 or 16. Others may have more official words.
If it is way too loose you can try turning the nut one notch at a time unti
l
it is tight enough. Have you ever taken nose wheel assembly off and
inspected and cleaned it, and regreased it The belville washer setup is ver
y
important so make sure you pay attention when you take it apart. It is
supposed to be removed every X and cleaned and regreased. Some do it every
annual. I do it every other year.
This may not fix it but it will shimmy if it is too loose and it is easy to
check.
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 5:44 AM, Tom Quinn <quinn_tom@tqiinc.com> wrote:
> I=92m having nose wheel shimmy issues upon landing. It isn=92t a problem
> during taxi or take off. The nose tire is less than a year old. Any advic
e
> on how to fix this? Thanks!
>
>
> Tom Quinn
>
> 249RR
>
> *
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
> *
>
>
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: Nose Wheel Shimmy |
I think Barry's info is more correct. That nose fork has to be so tight tha
t
it is scary but it works. My AP gets it right by feel but use a scale to be
sure. . Def above what the book says.
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 7:10 AM, FLYaDIVE <flyadive@gmail.com> wrote:
> Tom:
>
> It is not the age of your tire (more than likely)... It is two items:
> 1 - The torque on the nose fork - The manual says something like 20 Lbs b
ut
> I find it needs to be about 30 to 35 Lbs.
> 2 - The torque on the axle - The torque should be tight enough to ONLY
> allow the tire to revolve 1/2 to 1 turn when done by hand with moderate
> strength.
>
> Pull out the manual and check out the procedures. ALSO when was the last
> time the nose fork was off for greasing? I'd bet not in quite a while.
>
> Barry
> "Chop'd Liver"
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 6:44 AM, Tom Quinn <quinn_tom@tqiinc.com> wrote:
>
>> I=92m having nose wheel shimmy issues upon landing. It isn=92t a proble
m
>> during taxi or take off. The nose tire is less than a year old. Any advi
ce
>> on how to fix this? Thanks!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Tom Quinn
>>
>> 249RR
>>
>> *
>>
>> st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-Lis
t
>> tp://forums.matronics.com
>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> *
>>
>>
> *
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
> *
>
>
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: Project X plane pics |
AWESOME GARY!
Do you do WINDOWS?
Barry
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 12:58 AM, Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Before and After
>
>
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: New customers plane. Complained his brakes didn't |
work.
Dang Gary.... That's EAR-WHICKY'D
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 1:05 AM, Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
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: | Nose Wheel Shimmy |
Thanks for the insight, I'm due for an annual soon and will pass this onto
the AP. Thanks!
Tom Quinn
Tiger 249RR
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Walt
Beaulieu
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 8:19 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Nose Wheel Shimmy
I think Barry's info is more correct. That nose fork has to be so tight that
it is scary but it works. My AP gets it right by feel but use a scale to be
sure. . Def above what the book says.
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 7:10 AM, FLYaDIVE <flyadive@gmail.com> wrote:
Tom:
It is not the age of your tire (more than likely)... It is two items:
1 - The torque on the nose fork - The manual says something like 20 Lbs but
I find it needs to be about 30 to 35 Lbs.
2 - The torque on the axle - The torque should be tight enough to ONLY allow
the tire to revolve 1/2 to 1 turn when done by hand with moderate strength.
Pull out the manual and check out the procedures. ALSO when was the last
time the nose fork was off for greasing? I'd bet not in quite a while.
Barry
"Chop'd Liver"
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 6:44 AM, Tom Quinn <quinn_tom@tqiinc.com> wrote:
I'm having nose wheel shimmy issues upon landing. It isn't a problem during
taxi or take off. The nose tire is less than a year old. Any advice on how
to fix this? Thanks!
Tom Quinn
249RR
st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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: | Nose Wheel Shimmy |
The belleville washers are critical, and every owner needs to understand th
eir design and purpose.- They are also called disc springs.
They are made of steel, (ours are not stainless, but they could have been)
and are cup shaped.- They will stack nicely like spoons, but this doubles
their resistance to flex which was their purpose.-
Most spring steel falls into the rockwell hardness testing between RC43 and
RC47, about like a knife backspring.
There has been much discussion about the stacking order in the nose fork, a
nd IIRC there are at least some of the maintenance manuals that got it wron
g.
I think sometimes there are 3, and sometimes there are 4 of them, but they
must meet lip to lip or bottom to bottom when contacting each other.- The
y also must meet a flat washer that is hardened or they will merely form th
e flat washer to their own shape and spring flex will be lost.
Get the stacking order correct.- Make sure every part is in good conditio
n or call Garner.- Tension tighter than book spec.- Tension drops with
wear, so recheck at EVERY annual, clean and re-grease the entire contact ar
ea.
Bob Hodo
=0A=0A=0A
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: IO-360 B1E (180 hp) |
Derating the power would be foe the same reason the 160 hp HP pistons for t
he =0ACheetah was derated. Not doing so requires a complete recertificatio
n of the =0Aairframe and operating manuals.=0A=0A=0A=0A____________________
____________=0AFrom: Brock Windsor <n2_narcosis@YAHOO.COM>=0ATo: teamgrumma
n-list@matronics.com=0ASent: Wed, September 29, 2010 3:32:13 AM=0ASubject:
Re: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)=0A=0A=0AHey Gary,=0A Why would
you have to derate the power on the 10:1? What would it be, an RPM =0Aresr
iction?=0A =0ABrock=0A=0A--- On Tue, 9/28/10, Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.
COM> wrote:=0A=0A=0A>From: Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM>=0A>Subject: Re
: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)=0A>To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.c
om=0A>Date: Tuesday, September 28, 2010, 10:42 PM=0A>=0A>=0A> =0A>I just sa
w this. =0A>=0A>=0A>"Why isn=99t a 200hp version of the IO360 an opt
ion? I thought I heard that =0A>someone transplanted an IO360/CS prop out
of a Cardinal with good results. No?=0A>Don"=0A>=0A>=0A>The 200hp, though
it sounds sexy as hell, is a terrible choice for the Tiger. =0A>1. It's 6
0 lbs heavier.=0A>2. Requires a modified engine mount=0A>3. Requires all ne
w baffles=0A>4. Requires a new airbox and inlet.=0A>5. Is an inch wider=0A>
6. Has a narrower detonation margin =0A>7. Wouldn't be able to fit my cowli
ng on it.=0A>=0A>=0A>A ported and polished parallel valve engine with 8.5:1
compression ratio will =0A>make 200 hp everyday. =0A>=0A>=0A>A stock para
llel valve engine with 10:1 compression ratio will make 210 hp. =0A> Derate
that to 180 hp and you have 180 hp to 5,000 + feet.=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A________
________________________=0A From: Don Curry <don.curry@inbox.com>=0A>To: te
amgrumman-list@matronics.com=0A>Sent: Mon, September 27, 2010 9:06:11 AM=0A
>Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)=0A>=0A> =0A>Why isn
=99t a 200hp version of the IO360 an option? I thought I heard that =0A
>someone transplanted an IO360/CS prop out of a Cardinal with good results.
No?=0A>Don=0A> =0A>-----Original Message-----=0A>From: owner-teamgrumman-
list-server@matronics.com =0A>[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matroni
cs.com] On Behalf Of Gary Vogt=0A>Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2010 7:31 PM
=0A>To: Teamgrumman List=0A>Subject: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
=0A> =0A>Option 1: IO 306 B1E with a fixed pitch prop. Simple. Easy. T
he STC would =0A>be very straight forward=0A> =0A>Option 2: IO 360 B1E wi
th a constant speed prop. More work for the STC. It's =0A>heavier. But,
you'd get a number of benefits.=0A> =0A>Option 3: IO 360 B1E with 10:1 com
pression ratio, constant speed prop, limited =0A>by manifold pressure to 18
0 hp. Better fuel specifics. 180 hp to about 5,000 =0A>feet. Getting thi
s STC will be a long process but has a lot more potential.=0A> =0A> =0A>
=0A>OK, so, which option do you prefer? Would you be willing to put a depo
sit =0Adown?=0A> =0A> =0A> =0A>http://www.matronics.com/contribution=0A>
=0A________________________________=0A =0A> Send any screenshot to your fri
ends in seconds...=0A>Works in all emails, instant messengers, blogs, forum
s and social networks.=0A>Try IM ToolPack at www.imtoolpack.com for FREE=0A
>http://t; http://forums.= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
=0A>=0A> st" rel=nofollow =0A>target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/N
avigator?TeamGrumman-List =0A>et=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com llow
=============== =0A=0A=0A=0A
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: Nose Wheel Shimmy |
Odds are, it isn't the tire. Tighten the castled nut on the nose strut a h
alf =0Aturn or so and then retry. =0A=0A=0A. . . . well, that's assuming
it's put together correctly. A rough estimate is =0A80% of the planes I ge
t (new to me) have the hardware installed wrong.=0A=0A=0A=0A_______________
_________________=0AFrom: Tom Quinn <quinn_tom@tqiinc.com>=0ATo: teamgrumma
n-list@matronics.com=0ASent: Wed, September 29, 2010 3:44:25 AM=0ASubject:
TeamGrumman-List: Nose Wheel Shimmy=0A=0A =0AI=99m having nose wheel
shimmy issues upon landing. It isn=99t a problem during taxi =0Aor ta
ke off. The nose tire is less than a year old. Any advice on how to fix =0A
===== =0A=0A=0A=0A
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: Project X plane pics |
only on airplanes
________________________________
From: FLYaDIVE <flyadive@gmail.com>
Sent: Wed, September 29, 2010 5:27:11 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Project X plane pics
AWESOME GARY!
Do you do WINDOWS?
Barry
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 12:58 AM, Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@yahoo.com> wrote:
Before and After
>
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: IO-360 B1E (180 hp) |
Oh, yea, it's not an rpm restriction, it's a manifold pressure restriction.
=0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0AFrom: Gary Vogt <teamgrumman
@YAHOO.COM>=0ATo: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com=0ASent: Wed, September 29,
2010 10:32:16 AM=0ASubject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)=0A
=0A=0ADerating the power would be foe the same reason the 160 hp HP pistons
for the =0ACheetah was derated. Not doing so requires a complete recertif
ication of the =0Aairframe and operating manuals.=0A=0A=0A=0A______________
__________________=0AFrom: Brock Windsor <n2_narcosis@YAHOO.COM>=0ATo: team
grumman-list@matronics.com=0ASent: Wed, September 29, 2010 3:32:13 AM=0ASub
ject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)=0A=0A=0AHey Gary,=0A Why
would you have to derate the power on the 10:1? What would it be, an RPM
=0Aresriction?=0A =0ABrock=0A=0A--- On Tue, 9/28/10, Gary Vogt <teamgrumman
@YAHOO.COM> wrote:=0A=0A=0A>From: Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM>=0A>Subj
ect: Re: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)=0A>To: teamgrumman-list@matr
onics.com=0A>Date: Tuesday, September 28, 2010, 10:42 PM=0A>=0A>=0A> =0A>I
just saw this. =0A>=0A>=0A>"Why isn=99t a 200hp version of the IO360
an option? I thought I heard that =0A>someone transplanted an IO360/CS pr
op out of a Cardinal with good results. No?=0A>Don"=0A>=0A>=0A>The 200hp,
though it sounds sexy as hell, is a terrible choice for the Tiger. =0A>1.
It's 60 lbs heavier.=0A>2. Requires a modified engine mount=0A>3. Requires
all new baffles=0A>4. Requires a new airbox and inlet.=0A>5. Is an inch wi
der=0A>6. Has a narrower detonation margin =0A>7. Wouldn't be able to fit m
y cowling on it.=0A>=0A>=0A>A ported and polished parallel valve engine wit
h 8.5:1 compression ratio will =0A>make 200 hp everyday. =0A>=0A>=0A>A sto
ck parallel valve engine with 10:1 compression ratio will make 210 hp. =0A>
Derate that to 180 hp and you have 180 hp to 5,000 + feet.=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A_
_______________________________=0A From: Don Curry <don.curry@inbox.com>=0A
>To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com=0A>Sent: Mon, September 27, 2010 9:06:1
1 AM=0A>Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)=0A>=0A> =0A>Why
isn=99t a 200hp version of the IO360 an option? I thought I heard th
at =0A>someone transplanted an IO360/CS prop out of a Cardinal with good re
sults. No?=0A>Don=0A> =0A>-----Original Message-----=0A>From: owner-teamgr
umman-list-server@matronics.com =0A>[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server@m
atronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary Vogt=0A>Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2010 7:
31 PM=0A>To: Teamgrumman List=0A>Subject: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180
hp)=0A> =0A>Option 1: IO 306 B1E with a fixed pitch prop. Simple. Easy
. The STC would =0A>be very straight forward=0A> =0A>Option 2: IO 360 B1E
with a constant speed prop. More work for the STC. It's =0A>heavier. B
ut, you'd get a number of benefits.=0A> =0A>Option 3: IO 360 B1E with 10:1
compression ratio, constant speed prop, limited =0A>by manifold pressure t
o 180 hp. Better fuel specifics. 180 hp to about 5,000 =0A>feet. Getting
this STC will be a long process but has a lot more potential.=0A> =0A> =0A
> =0A>OK, so, which option do you prefer? Would you be willing to put a de
posit =0Adown?=0A> =0A> =0A> =0A>http://www.matronics.com/contribution=0A>
=0A________________________________=0A =0A> Send any screenshot to your fri
ends in seconds...=0A>Works in all emails, instant messengers, blogs, forum
s and social networks.=0A>Try IM ToolPack at www.imtoolpack.com for FREE=0A
>http://t; http://forums.matronics.com/http://www.matronics.com/contributio
n =0A>=0A> st" rel=nofollow =0A>target=_blank>http://www.matronics.co
m/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List =0A>et=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com ll
ow =0A>target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution =0A>=0A=0Aht
tp://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGru="_blank" =0Ahref="http://forum
========= =0A=0A=0A=0A
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Project X plane pics |
The real ethical question is=2C do you adjust the customer bill for the dif
ference of the loose change that you find. Typically 15 to 75 sticky cents.
...
From: teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Project X plane pics
only on airplanes
From: FLYaDIVE <flyadive@gmail.com>
Sent: Wed=2C September 29=2C 2010 5:27:11 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Project X plane pics
AWESOME GARY!
Do you do WINDOWS?
Barry
On Wed=2C Sep 29=2C 2010 at 12:58 AM=2C Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@yahoo.com> w
rote:
Before and After
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: Project X plane pics |
Clytie found one nickel under the back seat. Not much of a find.
________________________________
From: Garner Rice <garnerrice@hotmail.com>
Sent: Wed, September 29, 2010 10:51:48 AM
Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: Project X plane pics
The real ethical question is, do you adjust the customer bill for the difference
of the loose change that you find. Typically 15 to 75 sticky cents....
________________________________
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 10:35:49 -0700
From: teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Project X plane pics
only on airplanes
________________________________
From: FLYaDIVE <flyadive@gmail.com>
Sent: Wed, September 29, 2010 5:27:11 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Project X plane pics
AWESOME GARY!
Do you do WINDOWS?
Barry
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 12:58 AM, Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@yahoo.com> wrote:
Before and After
>
List" target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
ttp://forums.matronics.com =_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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: Nose Wheel Shimmy |
The manual says 10-22 lb. I've found that setting it around 20 lb will
not result in any shimmy if the tire pressure is correct and the fork is
adjusted and lubed properly. No excess drag from the O-ring and not
shimmed properly. 30-35 lb is to much and will require much more brake
to effect steering, wearing out the brake linings quicker.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: Walt Beaulieu
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 5:19 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Nose Wheel Shimmy
I think Barry's info is more correct. That nose fork has to be so
tight that it is scary but it works. My AP gets it right by feel but use
a scale to be sure. . Def above what the book says.
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 7:10 AM, FLYaDIVE <flyadive@gmail.com> wrote:
Tom:
It is not the age of your tire (more than likely)... It is two
items:
1 - The torque on the nose fork - The manual says something like 20
Lbs but I find it needs to be about 30 to 35 Lbs.
2 - The torque on the axle - The torque should be tight enough to
ONLY allow the tire to revolve 1/2 to 1 turn when done by hand with
moderate strength.
Pull out the manual and check out the procedures. ALSO when was the
last time the nose fork was off for greasing? I'd bet not in quite a
while.
Barry
"Chop'd Liver"
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 6:44 AM, Tom Quinn <quinn_tom@tqiinc.com>
wrote:
I=92m having nose wheel shimmy issues upon landing. It isn=92t a
problem during taxi or take off. The nose tire is less than a year old.
Any advice on how to fix this? Thanks!
Tom Quinn
249RR
st"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
st"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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: IO-360 B1E (180 hp) |
All valid reasons and much better to derate the MP rather than RPM. As
I mentioned you then have a very effective high altitude efficient
engine in comparison to the stock one. Couple that with more efficiency
at lower speed for both the engine AND prop with a CS prop and you have
a good combination. Don't know why you would want to go to all the
certification expense and hassle without a CS prop.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Vogt
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 8:42 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
I just saw this.
"Why isn=99t a 200hp version of the IO360 an option? I thought
I heard that someone transplanted an IO360/CS prop out of a Cardinal
with good results. No?
Don"
The 200hp, though it sounds sexy as hell, is a terrible choice for the
Tiger.
1. It's 60 lbs heavier.
2. Requires a modified engine mount
3. Requires all new baffles
4. Requires a new airbox and inlet.
5. Is an inch wider
6. Has a narrower detonation margin
7. Wouldn't be able to fit my cowling on it.
A ported and polished parallel valve engine with 8.5:1 compression
ratio will make 200 hp everyday.
A stock parallel valve engine with 10:1 compression ratio will make
210 hp. Derate that to 180 hp and you have 180 hp to 5,000 + feet.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: Don Curry <don.curry@inbox.com>
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Mon, September 27, 2010 9:06:11 AM
Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
Why isn=99t a 200hp version of the IO360 an option? I thought I
heard that someone transplanted an IO360/CS prop out of a Cardinal with
good results. No?
Don
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary
Vogt
Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2010 7:31 PM
To: Teamgrumman List
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
Option 1: IO 306 B1E with a fixed pitch prop. Simple. Easy. The
STC would be very straight forward
Option 2: IO 360 B1E with a constant speed prop. More work for the
STC. It's heavier. But, you'd get a number of benefits.
Option 3: IO 360 B1E with 10:1 compression ratio, constant speed
prop, limited by manifold pressure to 180 hp. Better fuel specifics.
180 hp to about 5,000 feet. Getting this STC will be a long process but
has a lot more potential.
OK, so, which option do you prefer? Would you be willing to put a
deposit down?
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Send any screenshot to your friends in seconds...
Works in all emails, instant messengers, blogs, forums and social
networks.
Try IM ToolPack at www.imtoolpack.com for FREE
http://t; http://forums.= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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: Nose Wheel Shimmy |
Good point Cliff.
The number is a guestamate and not very exact.
It is compared to lifting my portable took box ;-)
I'll rig up something to verify the number.
Barry
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 3:44 PM, flyv35b <flyv35b@minetfiber.com> wrote:
> *The manual says 10-22 lb. I've found that setting it around 20 lb will
> not result in any shimmy if the tire pressure is correct and the fork is
> adjusted and lubed properly. No excess drag from the O-ring and not shim
med
> properly. 30-35 lb is to much and will require much more brake to effect
> steering, wearing out the brake linings quicker.*
> **
> *Cliff*
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Walt Beaulieu <aviation@acs-group.net>
> *To:* teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 29, 2010 5:19 AM
> *Subject:* Re: TeamGrumman-List: Nose Wheel Shimmy
>
> I think Barry's info is more correct. That nose fork has to be so tight
> that it is scary but it works. My AP gets it right by feel but use a scal
e
> to be sure. . Def above what the book says.
>
> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 7:10 AM, FLYaDIVE <flyadive@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Tom:
>>
>> It is not the age of your tire (more than likely)... It is two items:
>> 1 - The torque on the nose fork - The manual says something like 20 Lbs
>> but I find it needs to be about 30 to 35 Lbs.
>> 2 - The torque on the axle - The torque should be tight enough to ONLY
>> allow the tire to revolve 1/2 to 1 turn when done by hand with moderate
>> strength.
>>
>> Pull out the manual and check out the procedures. ALSO when was the las
t
>> time the nose fork was off for greasing? I'd bet not in quite a while.
>>
>> Barry
>> "Chop'd Liver"
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 6:44 AM, Tom Quinn <quinn_tom@tqiinc.com> wrote
:
>>
>>> I=92m having nose wheel shimmy issues upon landing. It isn=92t a prob
lem
>>> during taxi or take off. The nose tire is less than a year old. Any adv
ice
>>> on how to fix this? Thanks!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Tom Quinn
>>>
>>> 249RR
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>> st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-Li
st
>>> tp://forums.matronics.com
>>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>> *
>>>
>>>
>> *
>>
>>
>> st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-Lis
t
>> tp://forums.matronics.com
>>
>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> *
>>
>>
> *
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.m
atronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
>
> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
*
>
> *
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
> *
>
>
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: IO-360 B1E (180 hp) |
So would it be a little red line overrev=C2-rpm restriction that you coul
d ignore, like on a cheetah or a peppy tiger, or since you would have a con
stant speed prop the governer would limit the rpm?
--- On Wed, 9/29/10, Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
From: Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM>
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
Derating the power would be foe the same reason the 160 hp HP pistons for t
he Cheetah was derated. =C2-Not doing so requires a complete recertificat
ion of the airframe and operating manuals.
From: Brock Windsor <n2_narcosis@YAHOO.COM>
Sent: Wed, September 29, 2010 3:32:13 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
Hey Gary,
=C2-=C2- Why=C2-would you have to derate the power on the 10:1?=C2-
What would it be, an RPM resriction?
=C2-
Brock
--- On Tue, 9/28/10, Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
From: Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM>
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
I just saw this. =C2-
"Why isn=99t a 200hp version of the IO360 an option?=C2- I thought
I heard that someone transplanted an IO360/CS prop out of a Cardinal with g
ood results.=C2- No?
Don"
The 200hp, though it sounds sexy as hell, is a terrible choice for the Tige
r. =C2-
1. =C2-It's 60 lbs heavier.
2. Requires a modified engine mount
3. Requires all new baffles
4. Requires a new airbox and inlet.
5. Is an inch wider
6. Has a narrower detonation margin=C2-
7. Wouldn't be able to fit my cowling on it.
A ported and polished parallel valve engine with 8.5:1 compression ratio wi
ll make 200 hp everyday. =C2-
A stock parallel valve engine with 10:1 compression ratio will make 210 hp.
=C2-Derate that to 180 hp and you have 180 hp to 5,000 + feet.
From: Don Curry <don.curry@inbox.com>
Sent: Mon, September 27, 2010 9:06:11 AM
Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
Why isn=99t a 200hp version of the IO360 an option?=C2- I thought I
heard that someone transplanted an IO360/CS prop out of a Cardinal with go
od results.=C2- No?
Don
=C2-
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-teamgrumman
-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary Vogt
Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2010 7:31 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
=C2-
Option 1: =C2-IO 306 B1E =C2-with a fixed pitch prop. =C2-Simple. =C2
-Easy. =C2-The STC would be very straight forward
=C2-
Option 2: =C2-IO 360 B1E =C2-with a constant speed prop. =C2-More wor
k for the STC. =C2-It's heavier. =C2-But, you'd get a number of benefit
s.
=C2-
Option 3: =C2-IO 360 B1E with 10:1 compression ratio, constant speed prop
, limited by manifold pressure to 180 hp. =C2-Better fuel specifics. =C2
-180 hp to about 5,000 feet. =C2-Getting this STC will be a long proces
s but has a lot more potential.
=C2-
=C2-
=C2-
OK, so, which option do you prefer? =C2-Would you be willing to put a dep
osit down?
=C2-=C2-=C2-http://www.matronics.com/contribution=C2-
Send any screenshot to your friends in seconds...
Works in all emails, instant messengers, blogs, forums and social networks.
Try IM ToolPack at www.imtoolpack.com for FREEhttp://t; http://forums.=
--> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
st" rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamG
rumman-List
et=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com
llow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGru="_blank" href="http://forums
.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.co
=0A=0A=0A
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: | Re: IO-360 B1E (180 hp) |
OK, so like a NASCAR restrictor plate in the carb?
--- On Wed, 9/29/10, Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
From: Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM>
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
Oh, yea, it's not an rpm restriction, it's a manifold pressure restriction.
From: Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM>
Sent: Wed, September 29, 2010 10:32:16 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
Derating the power would be foe the same reason the 160 hp HP pistons for t
he Cheetah was derated. =C2-Not doing so requires a complete recertificat
ion of the airframe and operating manuals.
From: Brock Windsor <n2_narcosis@YAHOO.COM>
Sent: Wed, September 29, 2010 3:32:13 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
Hey Gary,
=C2-=C2- Why=C2-would you have to derate the power on the 10:1?=C2-
What would it be, an RPM resriction?
=C2-
Brock
--- On Tue, 9/28/10, Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
From: Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM>
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
I just saw this. =C2-
"Why isn=99t a 200hp version of the IO360 an option?=C2- I thought
I heard that someone transplanted an IO360/CS prop out of a Cardinal with g
ood results.=C2- No?
Don"
The 200hp, though it sounds sexy as hell, is a terrible choice for the Tige
r. =C2-
1. =C2-It's 60 lbs heavier.
2. Requires a modified engine mount
3. Requires all new baffles
4. Requires a new airbox and inlet.
5. Is an inch wider
6. Has a narrower detonation margin=C2-
7. Wouldn't be able to fit my cowling on it.
A ported and polished parallel valve engine with 8.5:1 compression ratio wi
ll make 200 hp everyday. =C2-
A stock parallel valve engine with 10:1 compression ratio will make 210 hp.
=C2-Derate that to 180 hp and you have 180 hp to 5,000 + feet.
From: Don Curry <don.curry@inbox.com>
Sent: Mon, September 27, 2010 9:06:11 AM
Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
Why isn=99t a 200hp version of the IO360 an option?=C2- I thought I
heard that someone transplanted an IO360/CS prop out of a Cardinal with go
od results.=C2- No?
Don
=C2-
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-teamgrumman
-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary Vogt
Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2010 7:31 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
=C2-
Option 1: =C2-IO 306 B1E =C2-with a fixed pitch prop. =C2-Simple. =C2
-Easy. =C2-The STC would be very straight forward
=C2-
Option 2: =C2-IO 360 B1E =C2-with a constant speed prop. =C2-More wor
k for the STC. =C2-It's heavier. =C2-But, you'd get a number of benefit
s.
=C2-
Option 3: =C2-IO 360 B1E with 10:1 compression ratio, constant speed prop
, limited by manifold pressure to 180 hp. =C2-Better fuel specifics. =C2
-180 hp to about 5,000 feet. =C2-Getting this STC will be a long proces
s but has a lot more potential.
=C2-
=C2-
=C2-
OK, so, which option do you prefer? =C2-Would you be willing to put a dep
osit down?
=C2-=C2-=C2-http://www.matronics.com/contribution=C2-
Send any screenshot to your friends in seconds...
Works in all emails, instant messengers, blogs, forums and social networks.
Try IM ToolPack at www.imtoolpack.com for FREEhttp://t; http://forums.matro
nics.com/http://www.matronics.com/contribution
st" rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamG
rumman-List
et=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com
llow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGru="_blank" href="http://forums
.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.co
http://wwttp://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/con
tribution============
=0A=0A=0A
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: IO-360 B1E (180 hp) |
Well, actually, yes. But, unlike the restricter plate, which is set for one s
et of conditions, I.e., sea level, you would be able to go to WOT as you go u
p. In other words, there would come an altitude at which you cannot get more
than, say, 25 inches of pressure at full throttle.
The redline, as it were, would be a red line on the MAP gauge. Does that mak
e sense?
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 29, 2010, at 7:51 PM, Brock Windsor <n2_narcosis@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
> OK, so like a NASCAR restrictor plate in the carb?
>
> --- On Wed, 9/29/10, Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
>
> From: Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM>
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
> To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
> Date: Wednesday, September 29, 2010, 12:46 PM
>
> Oh, yea, it's not an rpm restriction, it's a manifold pressure restriction
.
>
> From: Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM>
> To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Wed, September 29, 2010 10:32:16 AM
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
>
> Derating the power would be foe the same reason the 160 hp HP pistons for t
he Cheetah was derated. Not doing so requires a complete recertification of
the airframe and operating manuals.
>
> From: Brock Windsor <n2_narcosis@YAHOO.COM>
> To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Wed, September 29, 2010 3:32:13 AM
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
>
> Hey Gary,
> Why would you have to derate the power on the 10:1? What would it be, a
n RPM resriction?
>
> Brock
>
> --- On Tue, 9/28/10, Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
>
> From: Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM>
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
> To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
> Date: Tuesday, September 28, 2010, 10:42 PM
>
> I just saw this.
>
> "Why isn=99t a 200hp version of the IO360 an option? I thought I he
ard that someone transplanted an IO360/CS prop out of a Cardinal with good r
esults. No?
> Don"
>
> The 200hp, though it sounds sexy as hell, is a terrible choice for the Tig
er.
> 1. It's 60 lbs heavier.
> 2. Requires a modified engine mount
> 3. Requires all new baffles
> 4. Requires a new airbox and inlet.
> 5. Is an inch wider
> 6. Has a narrower detonation margin
> 7. Wouldn't be able to fit my cowling on it.
>
> A ported and polished parallel valve engine with 8.5:1 compression ratio w
ill make 200 hp everyday.
>
> A stock parallel valve engine with 10:1 compression ratio will make 210 hp
. Derate that to 180 hp and you have 180 hp to 5,000 + feet.
>
> From: Don Curry <don.curry@inbox.com>
> To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Mon, September 27, 2010 9:06:11 AM
> Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
>
> Why isn=99t a 200hp version of the IO360 an option? I thought I hea
rd that someone transplanted an IO360/CS prop out of a Cardinal with good re
sults. No?
> Don
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-teamgrumma
n-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary Vogt
> Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2010 7:31 PM
> To: Teamgrumman List
> Subject: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
>
>
>
> Option 1: IO 306 B1E with a fixed pitch prop. Simple. Easy. The STC w
ould be very straight forward
>
>
>
> Option 2: IO 360 B1E with a constant speed prop. More work for the STC.
It's heavier. But, you'd get a number of benefits.
>
>
>
> Option 3: IO 360 B1E with 10:1 compression ratio, constant speed prop, li
mited by manifold pressure to 180 hp. Better fuel specifics. 180 hp to abo
ut 5,000 feet. Getting this STC will be a long process but has a lot more p
otential.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> OK, so, which option do you prefer? Would you be willing to put a deposit
down?
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> Send any screenshot to your friends in seconds...
> Works in all emails, instant messengers, blogs, forums and social networks
.
> Try IM ToolPack at www.imtoolpack.com for FREE
> http://t; http://forums.matronics.com/http://www.matronics.com/contributio
n
>
>
>
>
> st" rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://www.matronet=_blank>http://for
ums.matronics.com
> llow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGru="_blank" href="http://forum
s.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.co
>
> http://wwttp://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/co
ntribution============
>
>
>
>
> st" rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Team
Grumman-List
> et=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com
> llow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
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! --
|