Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 07:03 AM - Re: Re: IO-360 B1E (180 hp) (flyv35b)
2. 07:04 AM - Re: Project X plane (flyv35b)
3. 07:28 AM - Re: Project X plane (lmassaro)
4. 11:25 AM - Re: Re: IO-360 B1E (180 hp) (Gary Vogt)
5. 11:26 AM - Re: Project X plane (Gary Vogt)
6. 11:32 AM - Re: Re: Project X plane (Gary Vogt)
7. 01:03 PM - Re: Pro-seal (cwleach)
8. 01:07 PM - Re: lost key (cwleach)
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) |
Are you sure it was only 100LL? They sell 130 octane at Reno.
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Vogt
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 6:07 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
The angle valve engine is actually more prone to detonation due to the
large valve pockets cut into the piston crown. Parallel valve engines
with 14.7:1 have been run at Reno on 100LL.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: flyv35b <flyv35b@minetfiber.com>
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Fri, October 22, 2010 1:40:16 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
<flyv35b@minetfiber.com>
Ned,
I didn't know that. Any restrictions on that STC? I think I recall
reading that the angle valve engine might be slightly less prone to
detonation because of the combustion chamber shaft. But it's probably
not more than 0.2 CR difference.
Heck, I'm going to be running about 9.7 CR on my 356 Porsche on 92
octane auto gas.
Cliff
----- Original Message ----- From: "discover" <923te@att.net>
To: <teamgrumman-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 12:07 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
>
> Hey Cliff,
>
> Are you aware of Firewall Forwards STC's for 10:1 pistons for
Mooneys and Cessna Cardinals? Yes, they had to demonstrate he detonation
margins to get the STC approved. And it is the angle valve engine..
>
> Ned
>
> I don't know if the FAA will issue a multiple STC for an engine
with 10:1 CR without a lot of "detonation margin" testing. You
obviously have a fair amount of experience with 10:1 CR with apparently
no problems with 100LL fuel at least and that will not only increase HP
and BSFC and be especially beneficial at high altitude where the engine
would not be derated by limiting MP. A 9.0:1 CR might be much easier
to get approved. The only real practical solution to the replacement of
100LL will be with
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: Project X plane |
Are the side air ducts made out of aluminum? Or fiberglass?
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Vogt
To: Teamgrumman List
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 6:36 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Project X plane
Here are some pics of the plane's interior. It's all back together
now. Without a side-by-side comparison it's hard to comprehend the
difference. I used a handheld florescent drop cord for the lighting.
The colors are off a bit.
I capped off the rear seat heat and installed the plastic console
panels. Gained 2 inched of foot room on each side; saved about 8 lbs in
weight. Plus, they are easy to remove for maintenance.
I wish the trim wheel and flap switch were in their correct places.
I'd put in a cup holder.
The modified cowling (with a new inlet design and K&N air filter from
a Tiger) is nearing it's final fabrication steps. Initially Dave
thought it would take a week. Two weeks later he's still making
parts/molds/tooling. He promises me it will be soon. I can't wait to
fly it.
Gary
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: Project X plane |
Nice pics...
Plane is looking real good.
Cant wait to see the new cowling...
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=316757#316757
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: IO-360 B1E (180 hp) |
that's what Ken Tunnell told me.
________________________________
From: flyv35b <flyv35b@minetfiber.com>
Sent: Sat, October 23, 2010 7:00:25 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
Are you sure it was only 100LL? They sell 130 octane at Reno.
----- Original Message -----
>From: Gary Vogt
>To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
>Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 6:07 PM
>Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
>
>
>The angle valve engine is actually more prone to detonation due to the large
>valve pockets cut into the piston crown. Parallel valve engines with 14.7:1
>have been run at Reno on 100LL.
>
>
________________________________
From: flyv35b <flyv35b@minetfiber.com>
>To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
>Sent: Fri, October 22, 2010 1:40:16 PM
>Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
>
>--> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: "flyv35b" <flyv35b@minetfiber.com>
>
>Ned,
>
>I didn't know that. Any restrictions on that STC? I think I recall
>reading that the angle valve engine might be slightly less prone to detonation
>because of the combustion chamber shaft. But it's probably not more than 0.2
>CR difference.
>
>Heck, I'm going to be running about 9.7 CR on my 356 Porsche on 92 octane
>auto gas.
>
>Cliff
>----- Original Message ----- From: "discover" <923te@att.net>
>To: <teamgrumman-list@matronics.com>
>Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 12:07 PM
>Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: IO-360 B1E (180 hp)
>
>
>>
>> Hey Cliff,
>>
>> Are you aware of Firewall Forwards STC's for 10:1 pistons for Mooneys and
>>Cessna Cardinals? Yes, they had to demonstrate he detonation margins to get
>>the STC approved. And it is the angle valve engine..
>>
>> Ned
>>
>> I don't know if the FAA will issue a multiple STC for an engine with 10:1
>>CR without a lot of "detonation margin" testing. You obviously have a fair
>>amount of experience with 10:1 CR with apparently no problems with 100LL
>>fuel at least and that will not only increase HP and BSFC and be especially
>>beneficial at high altitude where the engine would not be derated by
>>limiting MP. A 9.0:1 CR might be much easier to get approved. The only
>>real practical solution to the replacement of 100LL will be with
>>
>
>
>href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-Listhref="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>
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: Project X plane |
not sure what you're talking about.
________________________________
From: flyv35b <flyv35b@minetfiber.com>
Sent: Sat, October 23, 2010 7:01:58 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Project X plane
Are the side air ducts made out of aluminum? Or fiberglass?
----- Original Message -----
>From: Gary Vogt
>To: Teamgrumman List
>Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 6:36 PM
>Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Project X plane
>
>
>Here are some pics of the plane's interior. It's all back together now.
> Without a side-by-side comparison it's hard to comprehend the difference.
I
>used a handheld florescent drop cord for the lighting. The colors are off
a
>bit.
>
>
>I capped off the rear seat heat and installed the plastic console panels.
> Gained 2 inched of foot room on each side; saved about 8 lbs in weight.
> Plus, they are easy to remove for maintenance.
>
>
>I wish the trim wheel and flap switch were in their correct places. I'd put
>in a cup holder.
>
>
>The modified cowling (with a new inlet design and K&N air filter from a
>Tiger) is nearing it's final fabrication steps. Initially Dave thought it
>would take a week. Two weeks later he's still making parts/molds/tooling.
> He promises me it will be soon. I can't wait to fly it.
>
>
>Gary
>
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 |
I can't wait to fly it. Dave closed out the opening on the bottom of the
cowling where the old inlet was. The housing for the air filter is the last to
be finished. I will send pics when I get some.
________________________________
From: lmassaro <lmassaro@tac-eng.com>
Sent: Sat, October 23, 2010 7:26:26 AM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Project X plane
Nice pics...
Plane is looking real good.
Cant wait to see the new cowling...
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=316757#316757
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 |
|
I think your gutter will work fine as long as it only rains 100LL!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=316782#316782
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 |
|
teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM wrote:
"I had a key made from the baggage door lock. After I put the baggage door back
together, I tried the canopy; it worked. Then I tried the ignition. Wouldn't
ya know. It worked too. There isn't a lot of good things I can say about the AG5B.
However, using the same key for all three locks was an awesome idea."
Don't let the TSA know that the same key works all three places. Their recent "security"
practices suggest* different keys for doors and ignition.
*suggest = we recommend it only until we're able to mandate it!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=316784#316784
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! --
|