Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:10 AM - Rotax 912S on e-bay (SKYSHOP)
2. 06:52 AM - Re: Corvair on 701 (Mark Wood)
3. 06:58 AM - Rotax 912S on e-bay working links (SKYSHOP)
4. 08:41 AM - Re: Corvair on 701 (Brian Caithcart)
5. 02:59 PM - BRS (Chris Weber)
6. 07:46 PM - Instrument Panel (John Birgiolas)
7. 08:00 PM - Re: Instrument Panel (ac6qj@earthlink.net)
8. 09:53 PM - corvair (reineros)
Message 1
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Rotax 912S on e-bay |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "SKYSHOP" <duba@gate.net>
Just for your info, we have Rotax 912S on e-bay. Overstock powerplant. Have
a look.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=26437&item
=1874117536&rd=1
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=26437&item
=1874118499&rd=1
Danny
---
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: Corvair on 701 |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Mark Wood <mawood@zoo.uvm.edu>
One of the issues of using a Corvair engine is that they make power at a
little higher RPM. To do this you need to turn a smaller diameter prop.
This makes a big difference with a high drag airframe where you want max
acceleration like in the 701.
I don't know how much of a difference it would make and I don't have the
background to figure it out, I am just passing on things I have been told
over the years.
Mark Wood
601HD 90% down 90% to go.
>--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Edward T. Jeffko" <riovista@bossig.com>
>
>I thought about a corvair in a 701 for my next project so I asked ZAC a HP
>and weight question. They recommend a max of 100 HP and 200lbs. weight.
>Anything heavier would require ballast in the tail. They indicated no
>structural problems with the heavier engine, only W&B. You're going to lose
>50 to 100 lbs. of useful load if you stay within gross weight, depending on
>how you build the engine. WW dosen't recommend a 701 as a good airframe for
>the vair. Didn't say why.
>
>Ed
>
>> From: "reineros" <reineros@pacbell.net>
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: | Rotax 912S on e-bay working links |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "SKYSHOP" <duba@gate.net>
Is your link correct for the Rotax 912S, I was not able to access it.
Steve Shuck
Steve : link is to big for line , goto http://www.skyshops.org/801EBAY.htm
for Rotax link.
Danny
Just for your info, we have Rotax 912S on e-bay. Overstock powerplant. Have
a look.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=26437&item
=1874117536&rd=1
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=26437&item
=1874118499&rd=1
Danny
---
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: Corvair on 701 |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Brian Caithcart" <bcaithcart@hotmail.com>
The corvair engine if converted as per William Wynne's manual produces an
honest 90-100 HP at 2900 RPM. Many of the old myths about corvair engines
have been blown out of the water since William Wynne came on the scene. Many
of the older Bernie Pietenpol conversions produced less horsepower and were
heavier because they used stock parts, retained the blower fan and used the
early model engines. The only engine to use is a late model (1965-1969)
110HP.
The corvair conversion for my 601 will start with a late model (1966) 110HP
engine. The blower fan will be removed and the engine will be totally
rebuilt with the best of the best everything. I will be using TRW forged
pistons and Clark's OT-10 cam. The OT-10 cam changes the torque curve to be
more favorable for direct drive aircraft applications.
The corvair is a bit heavy for the 701 at 235 pounds but is a perfect match
for the 601.
The popular overheating myths are a result of using the wrong heads and the
wrong spark advance, or just from using the wrong model engine. The oil
leaking problems have been solved by using modern gaskets. The originals
were natural rubber and would dry out.
For more info check out William Wynne's website: www.flycorvair.com
My engine will cost about $3000 CDN ready to fly. The best deal in sport
aviation.
Regards,
Brian Caithcart
CH601HD
>From: Mark Wood <mawood@zoo.uvm.edu>
>Reply-To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Corvair on 701
>Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 10:08:35 -0500
>
>--> Zenith-List message posted by: Mark Wood <mawood@zoo.uvm.edu>
>
>One of the issues of using a Corvair engine is that they make power at a
>little higher RPM. To do this you need to turn a smaller diameter prop.
>This makes a big difference with a high drag airframe where you want max
>acceleration like in the 701.
>
>I don't know how much of a difference it would make and I don't have the
>background to figure it out, I am just passing on things I have been told
>over the years.
>
>Mark Wood
>601HD 90% down 90% to go.
>
>
> >--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Edward T. Jeffko"
><riovista@bossig.com>
> >
> >I thought about a corvair in a 701 for my next project so I asked ZAC a
>HP
> >and weight question. They recommend a max of 100 HP and 200lbs. weight.
> >Anything heavier would require ballast in the tail. They indicated no
> >structural problems with the heavier engine, only W&B. You're going to
>lose
> >50 to 100 lbs. of useful load if you stay within gross weight, depending
>on
> >how you build the engine. WW dosen't recommend a 701 as a good airframe
>for
> >the vair. Didn't say why.
> >
> >Ed
> >
> >> From: "reineros" <reineros@pacbell.net>
>
>
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 |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Chris Weber" <chrisoz@gmx.net>
Hello Peter,
thanks for the information on the BRS you sent me. I will elaborate on my
original posting to clarify some of the things you remarked about.
> Hi Chris
> Your posting re BRS raised my eyebrows and probably
> that of others....
>
> 1. Your CH601HD is 1200lbs, so I am not sure why
> you selected the BRS 1050 instead of the 1200.
> Did you buy it earlier for the 601UL you just sold ?
I bought the unit from a friend in Germany, who changed to a Junkers system.
All UL in Germany are limited to 450 kg MTOW and are required to carry a
Balistic System.
I was able to buy the 5 year old Canister System for 800$US, and it is a
nice thing to have in the event of structural failure (with a Zodiac?),
unlandable terrain or loss of control.
To exceed the 1050 lb of the sytem I have to stuff my winglockers with
luggage, two average pilots and full fuel are okay.
So the system will cover me for all my test flights, and 95 percent of the
normal flights. The sytem is limited to 250 km/h, and has succesfully been
tested up to 300 km/h.
So the draggy and comparatively slow HD won't have a problem with the
opening shock, and the slightly higher sink rate at the theoretical all up
weight with full fuel, heavy pilots and full luggage is still better than
being dead.
>
> 2. Bridle fixtures: In front there are two attachment
> points either side - lower firewall
> and in front of the rudder pedals.
> At the rear it is just behind the
> rear zee, (but in front of the step
> fixing points) and connected to the
> lower longerons.
> NB. BRS reinforcement angles are
> used to distribute the shock
> loadings on deployment at all
> attachment points.
The BRS website doesn't list the Zodiac as a type that has been approved for
the system, and the manual states that the attatchment points should be
above the CG, so I am a bit surprised at the front location.
Do the bridles run through the cockpit?
> 3. Location of chute. If I understand your posting, the
> chute is located under the glare shield in front of the
> instrument panel ? Not so with my BRS...it goes
> on the rear parcel shelf in the cockpit.
All Units on German Zodiacs are in the front fuselage, thats why I would
consider to put it there, too.
Your location sounds more attractive, though, as egress of the system
strikes me as cleaner. On the other hand I would not fancy the rocket to go
of next to my head, these things are extremely noisy!
> 4. Stainless steel cables. BRS supply all synthetic cables
> as part of the kit for the 601. S/S wouldnt do much for
> weight considerations.
Page two of the BRS manual talks about "the routing of the steel cable
bridle or Kevlar bridle".
The Kevlar bridles aren't exactly lightweight, and S/S would make for a much
sleeker installation if the bridles have to run externally on the fuselage.
Plus they would cut smoothly through their covers, they could be hidden
under riveted .016 strips and still deploy easily.
I know that with the German Zodiacs you will loose your canopy if you deploy
the system, it gets torn away by the bridles. That is not the case with my
new Zodiac, as the gullwing doors, fixed windscreen and raised rear deck are
quite different, and I would really like to keep bridles and debris out of
the cockpit and away from my feet.
> I would strongly recommend you contact BRS who
> can advise on installation. They have been very
> helpful to me.
>
I will write to BRS to get more information, as they obviously do offer a
system for the 601. But with the litigation system in the US of A I do not
expect to much as I have a second hand system that is to small, unless I
limit my MTOW to 1050 kg. And they can't check nor enforce that, with me
being over here in Australia. We'll see.
Thanks again,
Chris
do not archive
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: | Instrument Panel |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "John Birgiolas" <johnbirgiolas@hotmail.com>
Dear List,
I am choosing the instruments for my 701 panel and could use your experience.
Power will be 912s.
My tentative list of instruments are:
Electric turn and bank
Airspeed, Altimeter, Variometer
Compass(airpass pedistal)
EIS (engine information system) Spruce catalogue page 353 for Rotax
Power panel (either mini power panel or exp bus) Spruce catalogue page 370
Radio panel mount ??
ELT ??
Garmin 196
That's my christmas wish list. Regarding the instruments, has anyone had problems
with the inexpensive imports (quite a savings), or would you suggest rc allen,
uma, sigma tek, or united instruments. Among the name brands, who gives
the best bang for the buck?
Will an electric turn and bank be enough to save my bacon in the occasional cloud
or fog, or would an artificial horizon be better.
Should i go electric with the gyro, or venturi for simplicity, and is the 2 inch
venturi enough to power a gyro in the 701?
The EIS seems pretty popular and serves many functions including tach, voltmeter
and hourmeter. Or would individual instruments (say Westach) be better.
Should I go with the panel mounted radio, or handheld portable?. I will not be
visiting busy airports often, mainly short cottage trips. Any particular brands
or models that are popular?
Intercoms are another source of confusion, there are so many, What are you using
and are you happy with the performance?
The power panels in the spruce catalogue seem to simplify the whole panel building
process. I have read the aeroelectrics arguments pro and con, but they seem
simple and elegant, and look good on the panel. Any experiences of users would
be greatly appreciated.
The garmin 196 seems a no brainer.
Finally, is there a popular ELT for a reasonable price?
Am I missing anything? Please let me know before I give my christmas wishlist to
my wife.
Thanks in advance
John Birgiolas
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: Instrument Panel |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: ac6qj@earthlink.net
>--> Zenith-List message posted by: "John Birgiolas"
><johnbirgiolas@hotmail.com>
>
>Dear List,
>
>I am choosing the instruments for my 701 panel and could use your
>experience. Power will be 912s.
>
>My tentative list of instruments are:
> Electric turn and bank
> Airspeed, Altimeter, Variometer
> Compass(airpass pedistal)
> EIS (engine information system) Spruce catalogue page 353 for Rotax
> Power panel (either mini power panel or exp bus) Spruce catalogue page 370
> Radio panel mount ??
> ELT ??
> Garmin 196
>
>That's my christmas wish list. Regarding the instruments, has
>anyone had problems with the inexpensive imports (quite a savings),
>or would you suggest rc allen, uma, sigma tek, or united
>instruments. Among the name brands, who gives the best bang for the
>buck?
>
>Will an electric turn and bank be enough to save my bacon in the
>occasional cloud or fog, or would an artificial horizon be better.
>
>Should i go electric with the gyro, or venturi for simplicity, and
>is the 2 inch venturi enough to power a gyro in the 701?
>
>The EIS seems pretty popular and serves many functions including
>tach, voltmeter and hourmeter. Or would individual instruments (say
>Westach) be better.
>
>Should I go with the panel mounted radio, or handheld portable?. I
>will not be visiting busy airports often, mainly short cottage
>trips. Any particular brands or models that are popular?
>
>Intercoms are another source of confusion, there are so many, What
>are you using and are you happy with the performance?
>
>The power panels in the spruce catalogue seem to simplify the whole
>panel building process. I have read the aeroelectrics arguments pro
>and con, but they seem simple and elegant, and look good on the
>panel. Any experiences of users would be greatly appreciated.
>
>The garmin 196 seems a no brainer.
>
>Finally, is there a popular ELT for a reasonable price?
>
>Am I missing anything? Please let me know before I give my christmas
>wishlist to my wife.
>
>Thanks in advance
>
>John Birgiolas
>
Hi John,
I'd recommend that you have an external antenna if you use a handheld
and provide external power. If you're going with an intercom then
I'd recommend a panel mount radio and intercom. There's nothing
worse than having the intercom batteries go dead when you need them
most and when you're going to be busiest (i.e. entering high density
traffic areas - albeit rarely or on approach) when you can ill afford
putting your head in the cockpit to swap connectors or batteries!
Not to mention all of those cables in the cockpit to contend with
(i.e. radio power, radio antenna, radio audio, intercom audio, push
to talk, etc.)
DO NOT ARCHIVE
--
Best regards, Ray Montagne
Cupertino, CA
Zenith CH601-XL
Builder #4939
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 |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "reineros" <reineros@pacbell.net>
Thanks for all the 701/corvair information. I look forward to hearing more if
anyone else has information. What a great way to share information, thanks again.
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! --
|