Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 11:18 AM - opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp (Brian Lloyd)
2. 12:37 PM - Re: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
3. 12:43 PM - Re: The Tweeters are gone guys. (fish@aviation-tech.com)
4. 12:56 PM - Re: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp (NC69666@aol.com)
5. 01:05 PM - Re: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp (Peter K. Van Staagen)
6. 01:20 PM - Re: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp (Budd Davisson)
7. 01:34 PM - Re: The Tweeters are gone guys. (Budd Davisson)
8. 02:00 PM - Re: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp (Larry Pine)
9. 02:17 PM - Re: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
10. 04:31 PM - Re: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp (Cpayne)
11. 04:36 PM - Re: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp (dabear)
12. 04:47 PM - Re: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp (Brian Lloyd)
13. 04:55 PM - Re: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp (Budd Davisson)
14. 07:09 PM - Re: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp (A. Dennis Savarese)
15. 07:51 PM - Re: high oil consumption (Roger Kemp M.D.)
16. 08:37 PM - Re: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp (Brian Lloyd)
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: | opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp |
I am getting ready to buy an engine for The Project. I am interested
in opinions about desirability of an M14P vs. M14PF in a CJ6A. Here
are my questions:
1. Would you pay more for a CJ6A with an M14PF instead of an M14P?
2. If so, how much more would it be worth to you?
3. If you were looking at several different CJ6As, would 400hp attract
you more than 360hp?
Brian Lloyd 3191 Western Drive
brianl AT lloyd DOT com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C
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: | opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp |
IMHO there is never too much power in an airplane.
More power is going to be a deciding factor between airplanes.
Yes, I would pay more for a PF vs a P equipped ANYTHING.
What it would be worth to me is hard to estimate, but at least 5-10
thou.
I don't fit in a CJ so I don't look. If it were a YAK-50, you're darn
straight... I'd run and not walk to buy it.
Mark Bitterlich
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian Lloyd
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 14:13
Subject: Yak-List: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp
I am getting ready to buy an engine for The Project. I am interested in
opinions about desirability of an M14P vs. M14PF in a CJ6A. Here are my
questions:
1. Would you pay more for a CJ6A with an M14PF instead of an M14P?
2. If so, how much more would it be worth to you?
3. If you were looking at several different CJ6As, would 400hp attract
you more than 360hp?
Brian Lloyd 3191 Western Drive
brianl AT lloyd DOT com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C
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: | The Tweeters are gone guys. |
Group,
I just arrived at Sheppard AFB, and the T-37's are parked
about 1000' from my billiting room.
Oh the memories they bring back (I used to be a T-37
crewchief, 1989/91). Hopefully the government will sell the
airframes to the public, and will get a chance to see them
at Airshows. I have a friend in Florida with an A-37.
Laterrrrr
Avn-Tech
----- Original Message Follows -----
From: "John Cox" <johnwcox@pacificnw.com>
Subject: RE: Yak-List: The Tweeters are gone guys.
> LOL and checking my hand, now how pathetic is that in old
> age.
>
> John C.
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of
> ByronMFox@aol.com Sent: Wed 4/16/2008 8:56 AM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: The Tweeters are gone guys.
>
>
> I had no affection for the Tweet. Hated the noise it made.
> Disliked having the instructor next to me. Inverted spin
> recoveries filled the canopy with dirt and scared me. It
> had a crappy panel, but it was an obedient formation
> airplane.
>
> Vietnam era F105/F4 pilot and author, Ed Rasimus wrote
> this about the Tweet. "The joke was that flying the T-37
> was like masturbating. It was fun while you were doing it,
> but afterward you were slightly ashamed." ...Blitz
>
> In a message dated 4/16/2008 4:34:52 A.M. Pacific Daylight
> Time, cjpilot710@aol.com writes:
>
>
>
>
> Tweet Complete: T-37 Retires
>
> Tweet Complete: T-37 Retires
> April 08, 2008
> Air Force Print News|by SrA John Parie
>
> COLUMBUS AIR FORCE BASE, Miss. - The T-37 Tweet
> formally retired April 3 from Specialized Undergraduate
> Pilot Training here after 39 years of service as the
> gateway to the sky for more than 10,000 Air Force
> aviators.
>
> Columbus Air Force Base was the last Specialized
> Undergraduate Pilot Training base flying the T-37, but the
> T-37 will continue to be used at Sheppard AFB, Texas, in
> the Euro-NATO Joint Jet Pilot Training program.
>
> Vance AFB, Okla., and Laughlin AFB, Texas, phased out
> the T-37 from their pilot training programs in 2007.
>
> "If you are a flier or a maintainer of any airplane,
> there is an emotional attachment," said Maj. Gen. Irving
> L. Halter Jr., the 19th Air Force commander. "The T-37 is
> a part of the fabric of Air Force aviation as well as
> American aviation."
>
> The first T-37 arrived at Columbus AFB in 1969 in
> preparation for the base's realignment from Strategic Air
> Command to Air Training Command in 1970.
>
> In 1970, Columbus AFB officials undertook the
> undergraduate pilot training mission, usng the T-37 for
> its primary training, and the T-38 talon for advanced
> training.
>
> T-37 tail number 68-8068 arrived at Columbus AFB from
> the Cessna factory in Wichita, Kan., Sept. 25, 1969, with
> a grand total of 9.1 flight hours to its credit.
>
> Thirty-nine years later, on March 31, 68-8068 was
> flown for the last student training sortie in the T-37 at
> Columbus AFB. Maj. Robert McGrath, an instructor pilot,
> and Capt. Jay Labrum, a student pilot, flew the aircraft's
> 10,351st sortie. The trainer jet ended its service to
> Columbus AFB with 16,637.6 flying hours.
>
> With the completion of his training sortie, Captain
> Labrum was the last Specialized Undergraduate Pilot
> Training student to utter the time honored words of "Tweet
> complete," signifying his completion of Phase II of the
> Air Force Specialized Undergraduate Pilot Training program
> and the T-37.
>
> "The T-37 has been a symbol of Air Force pilot
> training for half a century," said Lt. Col. David Johnson,
> the 37th Flying Training Squadron commander. "While
> getting newer aircraft is always a good thing, the Tweet
> was a living, breathing piece of pilot training heritage
> being used on a daily basis to train our young men and
> women."
>
> The retirement ceremony culminated with a four-ship
> T-37 fly over by members of the 37th Flying Training
> Squadron.
>
> "Goodbye, old girl. We are going to miss you," General
> Halter said. "You have done much for this nation and have
> made dreams come true."
>
> Digg
> <http://www.digg.com/submit?phase=2&url=http://www.militar
> y.com/news/article/air-force-news/tweet-complete-t-37-reti
> res.html> | del.icio.us
> <http://del.icio.us/post?url=http://www.military.com/news/
> article/air-force-news/tweet-complete-t-37-retires.html&ti
> tle=Tweet Complete: T-37 Retires>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms and advice on AOL Money
> & Finance
> <http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolcmp00300000002850> .
>
>
>
> ="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List">http://www.
> matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> .matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
>
> ://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.co
> m/contribution
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms and advice on AOL Money &
> Finance
> <http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolcmp00300000002850> .
>
>
>
>
>
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: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp |
Too much Horse Power is almost enough. Gary.
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
-----Original Message-----
From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
To:<yak-list@matronics.com>
Subject: RE: Yak-List: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp
IMHO there is never too much power in an airplane.
More power is going to be a deciding factor between airplanes.
Yes, I would pay more for a PF vs a P equipped ANYTHING.
What it would be worth to me is hard to estimate, but at least 5-10
thou.
I don't fit in a CJ so I don't look. If it were a YAK-50, you're darn
straight... I'd run and not walk to buy it.
Mark Bitterlich
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian Lloyd
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 14:13
Subject: Yak-List: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp
I am getting ready to buy an engine for The Project. I am interested in
opinions about desirability of an M14P vs. M14PF in a CJ6A. Here are my
questions:
1. Would you pay more for a CJ6A with an M14PF instead of an M14P?
2. If so, how much more would it be worth to you?
3. If you were looking at several different CJ6As, would 400hp attract
you more than 360hp?
Brian Lloyd 3191 Western Drive
brianl AT lloyd DOT com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C
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: | opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp |
More power is always better, but is it enough to really tell a difference.
If you think about it in terms of power to weight, getting 11% more power is
like the difference between the performance with and without a 200 lb
backseater. In my experience the yak52 with 360hp and the paddle blade prop
still out accelerates and out climbs the 400 HP CJ-6, but then cruise flight
is another story.
I think a lot will really depend on the engine prop combo and of course what
you are going to do with the plane. You'll never have the performance of a
SU29 in aerobatics.
I've been led to believe that the PF engines require more maintenance and
TBO is sooner, but I don't know that from personal experience.
I'd say you probably can't go wrong with more power in the long run.
Squatch
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian Lloyd
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 1:13 PM
Subject: Yak-List: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp
I am getting ready to buy an engine for The Project. I am interested
in opinions about desirability of an M14P vs. M14PF in a CJ6A. Here
are my questions:
1. Would you pay more for a CJ6A with an M14PF instead of an M14P?
2. If so, how much more would it be worth to you?
3. If you were looking at several different CJ6As, would 400hp attract
you more than 360hp?
Brian Lloyd 3191 Western Drive
brianl AT lloyd DOT com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C
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: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp |
It's of any help, I have a brand new, 1999 M-14P with American wires and B &
C pad, old style flange. It's never been unwrapped and has been in my hangar
here in AZ since new. $25K.
bd
On 4/17/08 11:13 AM, "Brian Lloyd" <brian-1927@lloyd.com> wrote:
>
> I am getting ready to buy an engine for The Project. I am interested
> in opinions about desirability of an M14P vs. M14PF in a CJ6A. Here
> are my questions:
>
> 1. Would you pay more for a CJ6A with an M14PF instead of an M14P?
>
> 2. If so, how much more would it be worth to you?
>
> 3. If you were looking at several different CJ6As, would 400hp attract
> you more than 360hp?
>
> Brian Lloyd 3191 Western Drive
> brianl AT lloyd DOT com Cameron Park, CA 95682
> +1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
>
> PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
> PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: The Tweeters are gone guys. |
Unless I'm mistaken, part of the acquisition agreement with Cessna was that
no T-37 airframe would be released directly to the public. The same deal as
the T-34's, which found their way to the public through aeroclubs. The
A-37's in the country, came back in from foreign governments.
Now all we have to do is talk them into giving Tweets to aeroclubs.
bd
On 4/17/08 12:40 PM, "fish@aviation-tech.com" <fish@aviation-tech.com>
wrote:
> <fish@aviation-tech.com>
>
> Group,
>
> I just arrived at Sheppard AFB, and the T-37's are parked
> about 1000' from my billiting room.
>
> Oh the memories they bring back (I used to be a T-37
> crewchief, 1989/91). Hopefully the government will sell the
> airframes to the public, and will get a chance to see them
> at Airshows. I have a friend in Florida with an A-37.
>
> Laterrrrr
> Avn-Tech
>
> ----- Original Message Follows -----
> From: "John Cox" <johnwcox@pacificnw.com>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: The Tweeters are gone guys.
> Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 09:50:49 -0700
>
>> LOL and checking my hand, now how pathetic is that in old
>> age.
>>
>> John C.
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of
>> ByronMFox@aol.com Sent: Wed 4/16/2008 8:56 AM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: The Tweeters are gone guys.
>>
>>
>> I had no affection for the Tweet. Hated the noise it made.
>> Disliked having the instructor next to me. Inverted spin
>> recoveries filled the canopy with dirt and scared me. It
>> had a crappy panel, but it was an obedient formation
>> airplane.
>>
>> Vietnam era F105/F4 pilot and author, Ed Rasimus wrote
>> this about the Tweet. "The joke was that flying the T-37
>> was like masturbating. It was fun while you were doing it,
>> but afterward you were slightly ashamed." ...Blitz
>>
>> In a message dated 4/16/2008 4:34:52 A.M. Pacific Daylight
>> Time, cjpilot710@aol.com writes:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Tweet Complete: T-37 Retires
>>
>> Tweet Complete: T-37 Retires
>> April 08, 2008
>> Air Force Print News|by SrA John Parie
>>
>> COLUMBUS AIR FORCE BASE, Miss. - The T-37 Tweet
>> formally retired April 3 from Specialized Undergraduate
>> Pilot Training here after 39 years of service as the
>> gateway to the sky for more than 10,000 Air Force
>> aviators.
>>
>> Columbus Air Force Base was the last Specialized
>> Undergraduate Pilot Training base flying the T-37, but the
>> T-37 will continue to be used at Sheppard AFB, Texas, in
>> the Euro-NATO Joint Jet Pilot Training program.
>>
>> Vance AFB, Okla., and Laughlin AFB, Texas, phased out
>> the T-37 from their pilot training programs in 2007.
>>
>> "If you are a flier or a maintainer of any airplane,
>> there is an emotional attachment," said Maj. Gen. Irving
>> L. Halter Jr., the 19th Air Force commander. "The T-37 is
>> a part of the fabric of Air Force aviation as well as
>> American aviation."
>>
>> The first T-37 arrived at Columbus AFB in 1969 in
>> preparation for the base's realignment from Strategic Air
>> Command to Air Training Command in 1970.
>>
>> In 1970, Columbus AFB officials undertook the
>> undergraduate pilot training mission, usng the T-37 for
>> its primary training, and the T-38 talon for advanced
>> training.
>>
>> T-37 tail number 68-8068 arrived at Columbus AFB from
>> the Cessna factory in Wichita, Kan., Sept. 25, 1969, with
>> a grand total of 9.1 flight hours to its credit.
>>
>> Thirty-nine years later, on March 31, 68-8068 was
>> flown for the last student training sortie in the T-37 at
>> Columbus AFB. Maj. Robert McGrath, an instructor pilot,
>> and Capt. Jay Labrum, a student pilot, flew the aircraft's
>> 10,351st sortie. The trainer jet ended its service to
>> Columbus AFB with 16,637.6 flying hours.
>>
>> With the completion of his training sortie, Captain
>> Labrum was the last Specialized Undergraduate Pilot
>> Training student to utter the time honored words of "Tweet
>> complete," signifying his completion of Phase II of the
>> Air Force Specialized Undergraduate Pilot Training program
>> and the T-37.
>>
>> "The T-37 has been a symbol of Air Force pilot
>> training for half a century," said Lt. Col. David Johnson,
>> the 37th Flying Training Squadron commander. "While
>> getting newer aircraft is always a good thing, the Tweet
>> was a living, breathing piece of pilot training heritage
>> being used on a daily basis to train our young men and
>> women."
>>
>> The retirement ceremony culminated with a four-ship
>> T-37 fly over by members of the 37th Flying Training
>> Squadron.
>>
>> "Goodbye, old girl. We are going to miss you," General
>> Halter said. "You have done much for this nation and have
>> made dreams come true."
>>
>> Digg
>> <http://www.digg.com/submit?phase=2&url=http://www.militar
>> y.com/news/article/air-force-news/tweet-complete-t-37-reti
>> res.html> | del.icio.us
>> <http://del.icio.us/post?url=http://www.military.com/news/
>> article/air-force-news/tweet-complete-t-37-retires.html&ti
>> tle=Tweet Complete: T-37 Retires>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms and advice on AOL Money
>> & Finance
>> <http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolcmp00300000002850> .
>>
>>
>>
>> ="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List">http://www.
>> matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> .matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
>>
>> ://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.co
>> m/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms and advice on AOL Money &
>> Finance
>> <http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolcmp00300000002850> .
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
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: | opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp |
Just remember, there's always that point of diminishing return. No matter how
much power up strap on. Sooner or later you hit that point where cost per HP,
doesn't make sense and doesn't buy you anymore speed!!
Where is that point on a CJ?? I'll leave that to the big dogs with deep pockets
to find out.
"Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
wrote:
IMHO there is never too much power in an airplane.
More power is going to be a deciding factor between airplanes.
Yes, I would pay more for a PF vs a P equipped ANYTHING.
What it would be worth to me is hard to estimate, but at least 5-10
thou.
I don't fit in a CJ so I don't look. If it were a YAK-50, you're darn
straight... I'd run and not walk to buy it.
Mark Bitterlich
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian Lloyd
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 14:13
Subject: Yak-List: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp
I am getting ready to buy an engine for The Project. I am interested in
opinions about desirability of an M14P vs. M14PF in a CJ6A. Here are my
questions:
1. Would you pay more for a CJ6A with an M14PF instead of an M14P?
2. If so, how much more would it be worth to you?
3. If you were looking at several different CJ6As, would 400hp attract
you more than 360hp?
Brian Lloyd 3191 Western Drive
brianl AT lloyd DOT com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C
Larry Pine
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
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: | opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp |
It's a matter of perspective. The difference in speed between a CJ with
360 HP and one with 400 HP is going to be more or less minimal.
However, it's impact on climb rate, short field performance, and a host
of other things will always be impacted by more horsepower.
Regardless, adding horsepower is most ALWAYS a matter of digging deep
into ones pockets. Remember, Brian did not ask what the feasability,
cost, or common sense was of ADDING the horsepower. He asked if it
would impact people when they looked at an airplane so equipped versus
one not so equipped and that said... By how much?
Pilots will always run to the airplane with the biggest motor. Some may
not, but the ones that don't usually are not the owners of YAKS and
CJ's.
Mark Bitterlich
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Larry Pine
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 16:57
Subject: RE: Yak-List: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp
Just remember, there's always that point of diminishing return. No
matter how much power up strap on. Sooner or later you hit that point
where cost per HP, doesn't make sense and doesn't buy you anymore
speed!!
Where is that point on a CJ?? I'll leave that to the big dogs with deep
pockets to find out.
"Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
IMHO there is never too much power in an airplane.
More power is going to be a deciding factor between airplanes.
Yes, I would pay more for a PF vs a P equipped ANYTHING.
What it would be worth to me is hard to estimate, but at least
5-10
thou.
I don't fit in a CJ so I don't look. If it were a YAK-50, you're
darn
straight... I'd run and not walk to buy it.
Mark Bitterlich
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian
Lloyd
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 14:13
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Subject: Yak-List: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp
I am getting ready to buy an engine for The Project. I am
interested in
opinions about desirability of an M14P vs. M14PF in a CJ6A. Here
are my
questions:
1. Would you pay more for a CJ6A with an M14PF instead of an
M14P?
2. If so, how much more would it be worth to you?
3. If you were looking at several different CJ6As, would 400hp
attract
you more than 360hp?
Brian Lloyd 3191 Western Drive
brianl AT lloyd DOT com Cameron Park, CA
________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
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: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp |
Ah,opinions! No facts need obsure the logic. For my money, an M-14P can be tuned
to deliver great performance without going to an increased supercharger gear
ratio.
On a CJ, airframe "adjustments" can lower drag and realize good MPG. After all,
at speeds above 175KTS, the ailerons get stiff. If you want a Mooney, buy one.
That said, a Yak really seems to benefit from more power as it's primary mission
is acro practice.
Craig Payne
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: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp |
Mark, There ya go again making generalizations.... :-)
You'll fit in a CJ. Just have to make some small modifications. I'll try
and make the NC event and let you sit in mine. Hopefully I'll have Barry's
rudder ped mod by then.
DaBear
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 3:34 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp
> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> IMHO there is never too much power in an airplane.
>
> More power is going to be a deciding factor between airplanes.
>
> Yes, I would pay more for a PF vs a P equipped ANYTHING.
>
> What it would be worth to me is hard to estimate, but at least 5-10
> thou.
>
> I don't fit in a CJ so I don't look. If it were a YAK-50, you're darn
> straight... I'd run and not walk to buy it.
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian Lloyd
> Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 14:13
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Yak-List: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp
>
>
> I am getting ready to buy an engine for The Project. I am interested in
> opinions about desirability of an M14P vs. M14PF in a CJ6A. Here are my
> questions:
>
> 1. Would you pay more for a CJ6A with an M14PF instead of an M14P?
>
> 2. If so, how much more would it be worth to you?
>
> 3. If you were looking at several different CJ6As, would 400hp attract
> you more than 360hp?
>
> Brian Lloyd 3191 Western Drive
> brianl AT lloyd DOT com Cameron Park, CA 95682
> +1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
>
> PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
> PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C
>
>
>
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: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp |
On Apr 17, 2008, at 2:14 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
MALS-14 64E wrote:
> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> It's a matter of perspective. The difference in speed between a CJ
> with
> 360 HP and one with 400 HP is going to be more or less minimal.
> However, it's impact on climb rate, short field performance, and a
> host
> of other things will always be impacted by more horsepower.
>
> Regardless, adding horsepower is most ALWAYS a matter of digging deep
> into ones pockets. Remember, Brian did not ask what the feasability,
> cost, or common sense was of ADDING the horsepower. He asked if it
> would impact people when they looked at an airplane so equipped versus
> one not so equipped and that said... By how much?
>
> Pilots will always run to the airplane with the biggest motor. Some
> may
> not, but the ones that don't usually are not the owners of YAKS and
> CJ's.
Thanks to everyone who has responded.
Just so everyone understands, I am making the decision to equip The
Project with an engine. There is no difference in cost to install an
M14P and M14PF other than the difference in engine cost. Prop is the
same too. So there are two questions:
1. Will I be able to get my money out of the airplane if I equip it
with a Huosai?
2. Will I be able to get my money out of the airplane if I equip it
with an M14P?
3. Will I be able to get my money out of the airplane if I equip it
with an M14PF?
4. Which of the above configurations will be easier to sell?
BTW, the rest is up for discussion too but the airframe is first-rate.
It is a 1967 airframe that has been totally disassembled and rebuilt
from the ground up. It has Doug's 36gal wing center section aux fuel
giving the aircraft 78 gal of fuel with stock wing tanks, more with
bladders.
So all I am trying to decide now is how to finish it out so that it
will be most salable. If someone is looking for a like-new CJ6A
tailored to their tastes, contact me now and I will be happy to equip
the aircraft the way you want it. BTW, it will NOT have the old
instruments or electrical system. These were removed and discarded.
Electrical system and panels will be brand-new and modern.
Likewise, since this CJ6A will be as light as it is possible to make
it, it will also climb like a bat-out-of-hell. The big engine will
also allow it to cruise effectively at the O2 altitudes when going
cross-country.
So, the next big decision is the engine and that is why I am asking
you guys.
Thanks.
>
Brian Lloyd 3191 Western Drive
brianl AT lloyd DOT com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C
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: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp |
The PF engine is a question mark in some people's eyes. The P is not. Factor
that into the equation.
On 4/17/08 4:44 PM, "Brian Lloyd" <brian-1927@lloyd.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Apr 17, 2008, at 2:14 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
> MALS-14 64E wrote:
>> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> It's a matter of perspective. The difference in speed between a CJ
>> with
>> 360 HP and one with 400 HP is going to be more or less minimal.
>> However, it's impact on climb rate, short field performance, and a
>> host
>> of other things will always be impacted by more horsepower.
>>
>> Regardless, adding horsepower is most ALWAYS a matter of digging deep
>> into ones pockets. Remember, Brian did not ask what the feasability,
>> cost, or common sense was of ADDING the horsepower. He asked if it
>> would impact people when they looked at an airplane so equipped versus
>> one not so equipped and that said... By how much?
>>
>> Pilots will always run to the airplane with the biggest motor. Some
>> may
>> not, but the ones that don't usually are not the owners of YAKS and
>> CJ's.
>
> Thanks to everyone who has responded.
>
> Just so everyone understands, I am making the decision to equip The
> Project with an engine. There is no difference in cost to install an
> M14P and M14PF other than the difference in engine cost. Prop is the
> same too. So there are two questions:
>
> 1. Will I be able to get my money out of the airplane if I equip it
> with a Huosai?
>
> 2. Will I be able to get my money out of the airplane if I equip it
> with an M14P?
>
> 3. Will I be able to get my money out of the airplane if I equip it
> with an M14PF?
>
> 4. Which of the above configurations will be easier to sell?
>
> BTW, the rest is up for discussion too but the airframe is first-rate.
> It is a 1967 airframe that has been totally disassembled and rebuilt
> from the ground up. It has Doug's 36gal wing center section aux fuel
> giving the aircraft 78 gal of fuel with stock wing tanks, more with
> bladders.
>
> So all I am trying to decide now is how to finish it out so that it
> will be most salable. If someone is looking for a like-new CJ6A
> tailored to their tastes, contact me now and I will be happy to equip
> the aircraft the way you want it. BTW, it will NOT have the old
> instruments or electrical system. These were removed and discarded.
> Electrical system and panels will be brand-new and modern.
>
> Likewise, since this CJ6A will be as light as it is possible to make
> it, it will also climb like a bat-out-of-hell. The big engine will
> also allow it to cruise effectively at the O2 altitudes when going
> cross-country.
>
> So, the next big decision is the engine and that is why I am asking
> you guys.
>
> Thanks.
>
>>
>
> Brian Lloyd 3191 Western Drive
> brianl AT lloyd DOT com Cameron Park, CA 95682
> +1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
>
> PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
> PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp |
Brian,
IMHO, here are my answers.
1. Yes
2. No
3. No
4. 1
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian-1927@lloyd.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 6:44 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp
>
>
> On Apr 17, 2008, at 2:14 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
> MALS-14 64E wrote:
>> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> It's a matter of perspective. The difference in speed between a CJ
>> with
>> 360 HP and one with 400 HP is going to be more or less minimal.
>> However, it's impact on climb rate, short field performance, and a
>> host
>> of other things will always be impacted by more horsepower.
>>
>> Regardless, adding horsepower is most ALWAYS a matter of digging deep
>> into ones pockets. Remember, Brian did not ask what the feasability,
>> cost, or common sense was of ADDING the horsepower. He asked if it
>> would impact people when they looked at an airplane so equipped versus
>> one not so equipped and that said... By how much?
>>
>> Pilots will always run to the airplane with the biggest motor. Some
>> may
>> not, but the ones that don't usually are not the owners of YAKS and
>> CJ's.
>
> Thanks to everyone who has responded.
>
> Just so everyone understands, I am making the decision to equip The
> Project with an engine. There is no difference in cost to install an
> M14P and M14PF other than the difference in engine cost. Prop is the
> same too. So there are two questions:
>
> 1. Will I be able to get my money out of the airplane if I equip it
> with a Huosai?
>
> 2. Will I be able to get my money out of the airplane if I equip it
> with an M14P?
>
> 3. Will I be able to get my money out of the airplane if I equip it
> with an M14PF?
>
> 4. Which of the above configurations will be easier to sell?
>
> BTW, the rest is up for discussion too but the airframe is first-rate.
> It is a 1967 airframe that has been totally disassembled and rebuilt
> from the ground up. It has Doug's 36gal wing center section aux fuel
> giving the aircraft 78 gal of fuel with stock wing tanks, more with
> bladders.
>
> So all I am trying to decide now is how to finish it out so that it
> will be most salable. If someone is looking for a like-new CJ6A
> tailored to their tastes, contact me now and I will be happy to equip
> the aircraft the way you want it. BTW, it will NOT have the old
> instruments or electrical system. These were removed and discarded.
> Electrical system and panels will be brand-new and modern.
>
> Likewise, since this CJ6A will be as light as it is possible to make
> it, it will also climb like a bat-out-of-hell. The big engine will
> also allow it to cruise effectively at the O2 altitudes when going
> cross-country.
>
> So, the next big decision is the engine and that is why I am asking
> you guys.
>
> Thanks.
>
>>
>
> Brian Lloyd 3191 Western Drive
> brianl AT lloyd DOT com Cameron Park, CA 95682
> +1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
>
> PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
> PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: | high oil consumption |
How many liters are putting in the tank before you go flying. I have found
that If I am doing acro that anything over 10 liters going to be dumped down
the side of the fuselage.
Doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Stlambrick@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 4:40 PM
Subject: Yak-List: high oil consumption
I too have excessive oil consumption with my Yak, at least 2 quarts an hour
during acro. I have done a compression check and looked for the obvious
leaks. The engine is leaking a little and I've tried to isolate the leak/s.
Today I put two bottles oil dye in the tank and ran the engine for a total
of 20 minutes at various power settings, as high as 80%. Even with the
hangars doors closed in total darkness I couldn't see any dye with the black
light. I read here recently that someone cured there oil consumption problem
after finding a leaking cylinder base gasket. My base gaskets seem to be
fine so I'm still trying to resolve the excessive consumption. Any other
thoughts? Thanks,
Steve
Yak 55
_____
It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms and advice on AOL
<http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolcmp00300000002850> Money & Finance.
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: opinions: 360 hp vs. 400 hp |
On Apr 17, 2008, at 7:06 PM, A. Dennis Savarese wrote:
> >
>
> Brian,
> IMHO, here are my answers.
> 1. Yes
> 2. No
> 3. No
> 4. 1
> Dennis
Thank you for that succinct reply Dennis.
--
Brian Lloyd 3191 Western Drive
brian HYPHEN 1927 AT lloyd DOT com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
Antoine de Saint-Exupry
PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C
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! --
|