---------------------------------------------------------- TeamGrumman-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Wed 09/29/10: 21 ---------------------------------------------------------- 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 _____________________________________ Time: 03:36:16 AM PST US From: Brock Windsor 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 wrote: From: Gary Vogt 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 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 _____________________________________ Time: 03:46:48 AM PST US From: "Tom Quinn" Subject: TeamGrumman-List: 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 _____________________________________ Time: 05:13:30 AM PST US Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Nose Wheel Shimmy From: FLYaDIVE 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 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 _____________________________________ Time: 05:15:51 AM PST US Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Nose Wheel Shimmy From: Walt Beaulieu 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 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 _____________________________________ Time: 05:27:33 AM PST US Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Nose Wheel Shimmy From: Walt Beaulieu 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 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 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 _____________________________________ Time: 05:30:29 AM PST US Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Project X plane pics From: FLYaDIVE AWESOME GARY! Do you do WINDOWS? Barry On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 12:58 AM, Gary Vogt wrote: > Before and After > > ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 05:42:31 AM PST US Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: New customers plane. Complained his brakes didn't work. From: FLYaDIVE Dang Gary.... That's EAR-WHICKY'D On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 1:05 AM, Gary Vogt wrote: > > ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 06:01:21 AM PST US From: "Tom Quinn" Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: 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 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 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 _____________________________________ Time: 08:10:34 AM PST US From: Bob Hodo Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: 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 ____________________________________ Time: 10:37:24 AM PST US From: Gary Vogt 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 =0ACheetah was derated. Not doing so requires a complete recertificatio n of the =0Aairframe and operating manuals.=0A=0A=0A=0A____________________ ____________=0AFrom: Brock Windsor =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 wrote:=0A=0A=0A>From: Gary Vogt =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 =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 ____________________________________ Time: 10:38:25 AM PST US From: Gary Vogt Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 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 =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 ____________________________________ Time: 10:45:47 AM PST US From: Gary Vogt Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Project X plane pics only on airplanes ________________________________ From: FLYaDIVE 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 wrote: Before and After > ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 10:51:23 AM PST US From: Gary Vogt Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 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 =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 =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 wrote:=0A=0A=0A>From: Gary Vogt =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 =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 ____________________________________ Time: 10:54:49 AM PST US From: Garner Rice Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: 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 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 w rote: Before and After ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 11:28:23 AM PST US From: Gary Vogt Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Project X plane pics Clytie found one nickel under the back seat. Not much of a find. ________________________________ From: Garner Rice 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 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 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 ____________________________________ Time: 12:47:21 PM PST US From: "flyv35b" Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 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 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 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 ____________________________________ Time: 12:50:53 PM PST US From: "flyv35b" Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 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 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 ____________________________________ Time: 01:57:11 PM PST US Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Nose Wheel Shimmy From: FLYaDIVE 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 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 > *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 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 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 ____________________________________ Time: 07:54:05 PM PST US From: Brock Windsor Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 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 wrote: From: Gary Vogt 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 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 wrote: From: Gary Vogt 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 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 ____________________________________ Time: 07:54:45 PM PST US From: Brock Windsor Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: IO-360 B1E (180 hp) OK, so like a NASCAR restrictor plate in the carb? --- On Wed, 9/29/10, Gary Vogt wrote: From: Gary Vogt 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 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 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 wrote: From: Gary Vogt 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 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 ____________________________________ Time: 10:14:02 PM PST US From: Gary Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 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 wrote: > OK, so like a NASCAR restrictor plate in the carb? > > --- On Wed, 9/29/10, Gary Vogt wrote: > > From: Gary Vogt > 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 > 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 > 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 wrote: > > From: Gary Vogt > 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 > 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 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message teamgrumman-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/TeamGrumman-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/teamgrumman-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/teamgrumman-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.