Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:15 AM - Re: Shipping Lesson Learned (Jeff & Marcia Davidson)
2. 06:15 AM - Re: Builder database is ready for testing (JEEdmondson@aol.com)
3. 08:12 AM - Speed Comparisons? (Carl Orton)
4. 09:30 AM - Re: Speed Comparisons? (James J. Cullen, Ph.D.)
5. 10:56 AM - Re: Speed Comparisons? (SEAL2CC@aol.com)
6. 11:10 AM - Re: Speed Comparisons? (Bill Morelli)
7. 12:12 PM - Re: Speed Comparisons?..confusing specs (Eric Tauch)
8. 12:21 PM - Re: Speed Comparisons? (Bryan Martin)
9. 12:33 PM - Re: Speed Comparisons? (Bill Steer)
10. 05:03 PM - Re: Shipping Lesson Learned (Jim Frisby)
11. 06:59 PM - Corvair engines for a 601HDS (Robert Rehmel)
12. 07:39 PM - Re: Speed Comparisons? (Philip Polstra)
13. 08:01 PM - Re: Shipping Lesson Learned (Bill Steer)
Message 1
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Shipping Lesson Learned |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jeff & Marcia Davidson" <jdavidso@fcc.net>
> Is Roadway the best way to have a kit shipped? Since we are paying for the
> shipping do we have a choice on which carrier to use or does ZAC
exclusively
> use Roadway because of price? Jack Russell Fresno-Chandler CA
My recent experience was that the relationship ZAC has with Roadway worked
in my favor. Roadway lost an entire shipment to me. This was a 4x3x9 foot
box! ZAC handled the problem completely, refilled the order, and had it
shipped to me free of cost. I presume that they used their influence with
Roadway based on the business they provide the carrier. The important thing
was that I didn't have to bother with it myself. The only thing I suffered
was a delay of about 2 months figuring out what happened and getting the
order re-filled. It was much easier that dealing with, say a mail-order
pharmacy.
Jeff Davidson
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: Builder database is ready for testing |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: JEEdmondson@aol.com
In a message dated 12/6/02 5:06:39 PM Central Standard Time,
matthew@mucker.net writes:
<< www.matthewmucker.com/builder_directory.asp >>
WAY TO COOL Mat!!!
Jimmy Edmondson
<A HREF="mailto:jeedmondson@aol.com">jeedmondson@aol.com
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: | Speed Comparisons? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Carl Orton" <corton@charter.net>
Hi all; Considering a Zenith kit, but have seen some disparaging remarks (yeah,
I know, ford vs chevy) on other newgroups about the 601 speeds not being what
they're advertised.
Data from the Zenith site indicates:
HD: 120 mph, 630 lbs useful load
HDS: 135 mph, 630 lbs
XL: 128 mph, 540 lbs
I'm looking for something to have fun in (aside from burning $$$) with occasional
500 mile trips with a passenger. I'm a bit on the chunky side, so full fuel
with me and a typical would be close/over gross. I don't care too much about
the speed, but want something faster than a 150/172.
I would want a standard nav/com with VOR plus transponder, but I've read some concerns
about the HD series not having enough panel depth due to the fuel tank.
I also noticed that the XL only uses wing tanks (BTW - are these wet wings, or
metal/bladder tanks?), so I would assume the avionics are a better fit.
So.... are the speeds above true? What is your typical cruise speed? How do you
fit your avionics. It seems like the XL would be better for the avionics (i.e.,
no "customization needed), but the HD/S would be better for higher gross weight.
Any observations to help decide?
Finally, anyone building/flying a Zodiac in the DFW area?
Thanks for your experience and opinions;
Carl
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: Speed Comparisons? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "James J. Cullen, Ph.D." <flyingcrownranch@lvcm.com>
Hi Carl:
> I would want a standard nav/com with VOR plus transponder, but I've read
some concerns about the HD series not having enough panel depth due to the
fuel tank.
My wife and I just started work on an XL. I've also heard about the panel
depth concerns on the HD (can't verify that it's true) but some builders
have added a center console just forward of the control stick and mount
their avionics there. The problem doesn't seem to exist on the XL because a
header tank isn't used.
I'm going to try to talk you out of a VOR installation if panel space is a
concern. We're going to install an Apollo/UPSAT GPS/COM and transponder in
ours. They'll both fit in the center console nicely and, because the GPS
doesn't require a VOR head, that saves even more panel space.
One thing I haven't figured out yet has to do with the gyros. We're
planning to install a Rotax 912S, which, I don't believe, has a vacuum pump.
Are builders installing electric gyros (expensive), no gyros (dangerous if
you inadvertently penetrate IMC), some form of electric powered vacuum pump
or (heaven forbid) a couple of vacuum venturis?
> I also noticed that the XL only uses wing tanks (BTW - are these wet
wings, or metal/bladder tanks?), so I would assume the avionics are a better
fit.
The wing tanks in the XL are aluminum -- prewelded at the factory or you can
build them yourself from the information provided in the plans. Cork strips
are used to float the tanks inside the leading edges of the wings.
>
> Finally, anyone building/flying a Zodiac in the DFW area?
If you ever get out to Las Vegas, you're welcome to visit our (just started)
project.
Tailwinds,
Jim Cullen
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: Speed Comparisons? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: SEAL2CC@aol.com
In a message dated 12/7/02 11:12:48 AM Eastern Standard Time,
corton@charter.net writes:
> It seems like the XL would be better for the avionics (i.e., no
> "customization needed), but the HD/S would be better for higher gross
> weight. Any observations to help decide?
>
I am building my HDS with LE wing tanks - no header tank so I will have same
panel space as an XL and 20+ gal. fuel..Enough for me and I don't want fuel
in the fuselage anyway..
Chris Carey
N601BZ
Richmond, VA
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: Speed Comparisons? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Bill Morelli <billvt@together.net>
Carl,
>HD: 120 mph, 630 lbs useful load
>HDS: 135 mph, 630 lbs
>XL: 128 mph, 540 lbs
>
>I'm looking for something to have fun in (aside from burning $$$) with
>occasional 500 mile trips with a passenger. I'm a bit on the chunky side,
>so full fuel with me and a typical would be close/over gross. I don't care
>too much about the speed, but want something faster than a 150/172.
- My HDS came in at 710 lbs so I made 1300 lbs my gross which gives me 590
useful load. Mine is powered by a Stratus Subaru which adds some extra
weight. If you wanted to maximize your useful load, I would go with a Rotax
or Jabiru and build LIGHT!!!! I weight 185 and my wife weights 130 so we
have plenty left for full fuel and baggage. I have a Radio(no VOR) ,
transponder, GPS and full set of instruments except for directional gyro
(which I left a spot for in the panel). Also the ZODIAC is pretty wide at
the shoulders (44 inches). I have taken up passengers in the 240 lb range
and they fit fine. Chunky is better than way tall in a ZODIAC.
>I would want a standard nav/com with VOR plus transponder, but I've read
>some concerns about the HD series not having enough panel depth due to the
>fuel tank.
The story with the HD and HDS is that if you use the 16 gallon header, it
is tight between the panel and the tank. I used an 8 gallon header (which
leaves plenty of room behind the panel) as well as two leading edge wing
tanks. That gives me 29,5 gallons of fuel. My average burn is 5.5 gph so I
have a good range. My HDS cruises at 120 mph. You can also go with no
header and just use LE tanks and will have around 21 gallons of fuel.
There are not too many that get the ZAC advertised speeds. There is a
Jabiru powered ZAC getting the advertised numbers but that is with 120 hp
which is way more than the original specs said you needed. Definitely
faster than a 150 and similar to a 172. The climb rate in a Zodiac (all
models) is typically way better than any 150 / 172.
The best part in my opinion is that my HDS is way more fun to fly than a
150/172. The visibility with the bubble canopy is outstanding, it is easy
to fly and very easy to land even in stiff cross winds.
If you like, you can check out my web site below. There you can play with
weight and balance numbers and see some photos.
Regards,
Bill (N812BM - HDS - Tri - Stratus - Vermont - 182.5 flight hrs. - 285
landings)
web site -> http://homepages.together.net/~billvt/
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: | Speed Comparisons?..confusing specs |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Eric Tauch" <erictauch@attbi.com>
Hi,
One thing I have noticed on the Zenith site is that the specs have been
moving around
based on the sport pilot regs. I think they see this as a big factor with
XL sales, even
to the detriment of the best published specifications (seems crazy).
I noticed the cruise has been moved down to the sport pilot figures. It
will actually
cruise much faster, and have read that you will have to "slow the plane
down" with a
climb prop to meet the regs. I have also heard that the top speed is not as
important
as the stall speed as applied to the sport pilot regs. I dont agree with
ZACS strategy
here as I think it will confuse their customers. I think they should have a
separate
sport pilot model, maybe limited to a lighter 80hp engine.
I think Zenith was orignally posting a XL cruise speed of 138mph, which with
the 100-120hp
Jab 3300, is probably more accurate. I am building an XL and remember the
gross being
at 1350, although the site lists differently now. Personally, I would not
consider
starting one of the previous designs, as the XL was designed to succeed the
earlier
models. Noticed I tip-toed around saying "improved"...;)
Eric Tauch
PS, I'm in the DFW area...Plano.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Carl Orton
Subject: Zenith-List: Speed Comparisons?
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Carl Orton" <corton@charter.net>
Hi all; Considering a Zenith kit, but have seen some disparaging remarks
(yeah, I know, ford vs chevy) on other newgroups about the 601 speeds not
being what they're advertised.
Data from the Zenith site indicates:
HD: 120 mph, 630 lbs useful load
HDS: 135 mph, 630 lbs
XL: 128 mph, 540 lbs
I'm looking for something to have fun in (aside from burning $$$) with
occasional 500 mile trips with a passenger. I'm a bit on the chunky side,
so full fuel with me and a typical would be close/over gross. I don't care
too much about the speed, but want something faster than a 150/172.
I would want a standard nav/com with VOR plus transponder, but I've read
some concerns about the HD series not having enough panel depth due to the
fuel tank.
I also noticed that the XL only uses wing tanks (BTW - are these wet wings,
or metal/bladder tanks?), so I would assume the avionics are a better fit.
So.... are the speeds above true? What is your typical cruise speed? How do
you fit your avionics. It seems like the XL would be better for the
avionics (i.e., no "customization needed), but the HD/S would be better for
higher gross weight. Any observations to help decide?
Finally, anyone building/flying a Zodiac in the DFW area?
Thanks for your experience and opinions;
Carl
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: | Re: Speed Comparisons? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Carl Orton" <corton@charter.net>
>
>
> Data from the Zenith site indicates:
>
> HD: 120 mph, 630 lbs useful load
> HDS: 135 mph, 630 lbs
> XL: 128 mph, 540 lbs
>
The 540 lbs useful load for the XL assumes it is built to the proposed sport
plane rules of 1232 gross. The XL was originally designed with a gross
weight of 1300 lbs. So if you aren't concerned about sport plane rules, you
have an extra 68 lbs of useful load to work with.
The HD and HDS models can be built with wing tanks only instead of the
header tank, so panel space is potentially the same for all three models.
All of the above speeds are for cruise with the 80HP Rotax engine (about
60HP in cruise). The HD and HDS were designed for up to 100 HP engines while
the XL is designed for up to 130HP and is a little bit cleaner
aerodynamically so it is potentially faster than the other two and has a
30mph higher Vne.
The wing tanks for all these planes are welded aluminum and fitted into the
leading edge of the wing.
If you are considering building to the sport plane rules I believe the XL is
the only one that can meet all of the PROPOSED rules but, since the rules
are not yet final, nothing can be taken for granted yet.
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
Wings, tail, fuselage and canopy done, wheels and tail mounted.
Working on instrument panel and electrical.
do not archive.
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: | Re: Speed Comparisons? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Bill Steer" <bsteer@gwi.net>
Hello, Carl. I'm not flying yet, so can't comment on the speeds. But I can
tell you that, depending upon your fuel system design, there can be plenty of
room for instruments in a 601HD. The standard 16 gallon header tank does take
most of the room behind the instrument panel, but you have two other options
available - either use the 8 gallon header tank or use the wing tanks, with or
without the smaller header tank. The wing tanks are welded aluminum, btw,
wrapped in cork when inserted into the leading edge of the wings.
Hope this helps.
Bill
> I would want a standard nav/com with VOR plus transponder, but I've read some
concerns about the HD series not having enough panel depth due to the fuel tank.
>
> I also noticed that the XL only uses wing tanks (BTW - are these wet wings, or
metal/bladder tanks?), so I would assume the avionics are a better fit.
>
> So.... are the speeds above true? What is your typical cruise speed? How do
you fit your avionics. It seems like the XL would be better for the avionics
(i.e., no "customization needed), but the HD/S would be better for higher gross
weight. Any observations to help decide?
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: Shipping Lesson Learned |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jim Frisby" <marslander@hotmail.com>
I agree, Roadway is a good way to ship from ZAC. However it seems you
should have ZAC arrange the shipping, I got a quote directly from Roadway
for shipping a CH801 cowl and an engine mount from MO to Kent WA ( an ocean
shipper "SpanAlaska") would take it from there. The Roadway quote (to me as
an individual) was about $250, Shirley at ZAC got it shipped by the same
company for about $90.
Jim
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
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: | Corvair engines for a 601HDS |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Robert Rehmel" <traveler601@earthlink.net>
Hi, I am seeking information from anyone who is using a Corvair engine. I
have one I can use and am intending on using William Wynnes method to set
it up. I would like to know what there experience has been.
Thank you
--- Robert Rehmel
--- traveler601@earthlink.net
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: Speed Comparisons? |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Philip Polstra" <ppolstra@mindspring.com>
> One thing I haven't figured out yet has to do with the gyros. We're
> planning to install a Rotax 912S, which, I don't believe, has a vacuum
pump.
> Are builders installing electric gyros (expensive), no gyros (dangerous if
> you inadvertently penetrate IMC), some form of electric powered vacuum
pump
> or (heaven forbid) a couple of vacuum venturis?
>
At the moment I have no gyros in my HDS. I'm thinking about getting an
Anywhere AI package and using that. About the same cost as electric gyros
and nothing behind the panel. Also portable.
I currently have a Garmin 250XL, CD-player, and Collins TDR-950 xpndr in my
panel. It all fits with the 16 gallon header tank.
I normally cruise anywhere between 100-130mph. It is all a matter of how
much gas I want to burn. I could probably get more speed by changing the
pitch on my prop. I typically climb out at 1000-1500 fpm in my
Stratus-powered HDS. I'm not usually in a hurry, so I haven't bothered to
mess with the prop.
---
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: Shipping Lesson Learned |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Bill Steer" <bsteer@gwi.net>
I agree with this. Get ZAC to arrange for the shipping. You can get them to
bill you for the shipping costs, along with your kit. That way there's no
hassle with the trucking company.
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Frisby" <marslander@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Shipping Lesson Learned
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jim Frisby" <marslander@hotmail.com>
>
> I agree, Roadway is a good way to ship from ZAC. However it seems you
> should have ZAC arrange the shipping, I got a quote directly from Roadway
> for shipping a CH801 cowl and an engine mount from MO to Kent WA ( an ocean
> shipper "SpanAlaska") would take it from there. The Roadway quote (to me as
> an individual) was about $250, Shirley at ZAC got it shipped by the same
> company for about $90.
> Jim
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! --
|