---------------------------------------------------------- Zenith-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Wed 12/11/02: 9 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 08:33 AM - Re: Corvair on 701 (JNBOLDING1) 2. 11:25 AM - 701 venturi driven instruments (John Birgiolas) 3. 12:02 PM - Re: Matt maybe you can help me out (Leo J. Corbalis) 4. 01:53 PM - Re: 701 venturi driven instruments (Dave Austin) 5. 02:33 PM - Re: kit vs scratch built, was: New To List (Gary Gower) 6. 02:47 PM - Re: Corvair on 701 (Gary Gower) 7. 02:51 PM - Re: Corvair on 701 (reineros) 8. 06:36 PM - New to list, to scratch build or kit. (Larry C. McFarland) 9. 09:55 PM - Re: 701 venturi driven instruments (Frank Stutzman) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 08:33:17 AM PST US From: "JNBOLDING1" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Corvair on 701 --> Zenith-List message posted by: "JNBOLDING1" ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- > >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 > Am also CONSIDERING a Corvair for a 701 but will use a hand prop version with the alum. cylinders to keep the weight low. Even with the EXPENSIVE LN cylinders the total cost of the engine will be under $7500 Am going to the Corvair College in San Antonio in Jan. Started looking around for core engines and they aren't too hard to find at $2-300 each. Wynn's manual is well worth the $60 if you are even THINKING about this engine. He is a "hands on" guy and has put a lot of hours FLYING what he sells,not just talking about it. Low and Slow John Bolding ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 11:25:10 AM PST US From: "John Birgiolas" Subject: Zenith-List: 701 venturi driven instruments --> Zenith-List message posted by: "John Birgiolas" I am considering installing venturi vacuum driven AI and wonder if anyone has had any experience with this type of system. Thanks John Birgiolas ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 12:02:54 PM PST US From: "Leo J. Corbalis" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Matt maybe you can help me out --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Leo J. Corbalis" Go to a model plane hobby shop. They have several versions of a piezo rate gyro in ready to use packaging. Leo > I am working on a wing leveler for my Zodiac and am will be using a MEMS > chip (solid state gyro). The chip only comes in a BALL GRID ARRAY package. > What I need is a source for a prototype board that will accept BGA type > devices so I can then plug that into my breadboard for debugging purposes. > > Do you know of such a source? If not, do you have any engineer type > acquaintances that may be able to help? > > Regards, > Bill > > ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 01:53:43 PM PST US From: "Dave Austin" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 701 venturi driven instruments --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Dave Austin" John, I've had a vacuum driven AH since 1993 which has served me well. The vac generator is an 8 inch one - too big, and probably costs me some drag, but I'm still here because I had it. It's big enough to drive at least two instruments. It is mounted on the passenger side below and to the front of the canopy. Price of the vac AH was much cheaper than an electrically driven AH and not as long so it fitted between the panel and the gas tank.. Dave Austin 601HDS - 912 - 525 hrs ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 02:33:30 PM PST US From: Gary Gower Subject: RE: Zenith-List: kit vs scratch built, was: New To List --> Zenith-List message posted by: Gary Gower >>3. Not necessarily based on the 640, but how much can I really save if I build from scratch rather than from kit? This is a very personal answer we all have to find out: 1.- Building a Kit will take about 6 months to a year (maybe some time more or less) of part time work. 2.- Building from scratch with the same time invested per week will take several years, because you will need to build also the "jigs" to make the parts... 3.- Te cost of the kit is about 13,000 (without engine for the 701, my case) plus shipping and costs. If the cost will be 1/3rd, from scratch will cost me about 5,000 dls. maybe more because is dificult (if not imposible) to buy "exactly" the amount of material for each part, so the material left over will be part of your costs. 4.- If you can use the time remaining working part time, you will earn easy the 8,000 remaining for the cost of the kit. If you are retired, you will have all the time and no paid work to do, this is another history... Well, this is one point of view. Saludos Gary Gower 701 kit 912S Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico. ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 02:47:18 PM PST US From: Gary Gower Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Corvair on 701 --> Zenith-List message posted by: Gary Gower Try the Geo-Raven conversions... they have several engines and the prices are in reason, Is the Geo Traker engine conversion (3 and 4 cylinders), they send reduction kits or ready to install full engines, the weight are similar to the Rotax 582 and the 912... Saludos Gary Gower --- reineros wrote: > --> Zenith-List message posted by: "reineros" > > Has anyone used a corvair on a 701? I apears it would be about 40 to > 50 lbs. heaver but my wallet would be much heaver than anything the > factory seams to recomend in 4 cycle. > > > > _-> > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 02:51:27 PM PST US From: "reineros" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Corvair on 701 --> Zenith-List message posted by: "reineros" Keep us posted on the 701 corvair project. Think of hand propping a tricycle airplane, not the same geometry as a tail dragger I have had to hand prop both and if you are of any stature at all, over 4' tall it is not comfortable to do. I want to teach my twelve year old daughter to fly so hand propping is out of the question. I am going to hold my engine decision in abeyance as long as possible, but it sure would be nice to make the correct selection as soon as possible to manage the budget considerations now and not be stuck with the airframe and no money for an engine. ----- Original Message ----- From: "JNBOLDING1" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Corvair on 701 > --> Zenith-List message posted by: "JNBOLDING1" > > ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- > > > > >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 > > > > Am also CONSIDERING a Corvair for a 701 but will use a hand prop version with the alum. cylinders to keep the weight low. Even with the EXPENSIVE LN cylinders the total cost of the engine will be under $7500 Am going to the Corvair College in San Antonio in Jan. Started looking around for core engines and they aren't too hard to find at $2-300 each. Wynn's manual is well worth the $60 if you are even THINKING about this engine. He is a "hands on" guy and has put a lot of hours FLYING what he sells,not just talking about it. Low and Slow John Bolding > > ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 06:36:22 PM PST US From: "Larry C. McFarland" Subject: Zenith-List: New to list, to scratch build or kit. --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Larry C. McFarland" Zenith builders, You know, there's something we've not mentioned about scratch building that eats into the savings a bit. That would be parts that you will make more than once. Of course, buying the parts you mess up will cost more too, but scratch building offers you more of a chance to do parts more than once or even twice. I've had the "privilege" of making 4 rudder spars, 5 ailerons, two right hand upper wing spar caps, three leading edge tanks, two sets of fiberglass stabilizer tips, 2 extra center section ribs, 3 sets of 7A ribs for the tanks, discarded 2 #7 ribs, made 2 sets of #9 ribs, 3 sets of wing attachment plates, 3 rear top skins, 2 forward top skins and am now on the 2nd header tank. If I were to do it over again would I scratch build? In a heartbeat! That doesn't make it any easier, but I like process. I wonder how many parts the kit builders have to redo. Probably fewer, because the most difficult ones are part of what you buy. And you generally get good response when you mess up something. Hope this doesn't discourage those who would become scratch builders. Fly safe guys, Larry C. McFarland - 601hds into the 4th year of progress. http://www.macsmachine.com Do not archive ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 09:55:31 PM PST US From: Frank Stutzman Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 701 venturi driven instruments --> Zenith-List message posted by: Frank Stutzman On Sun, 8 Dec 2002, John Birgiolas wrote: > --> Zenith-List message posted by: "John Birgiolas" > > I am considering installing venturi vacuum driven AI and wonder if > anyone has had any experience with this type of system. Yes. On a Cessna 170. Didn't like it very much. The venturi really didn't pull enough vacuum until you were pretty much at the end of take off roll. Made it pretty hard to make sure it was working before take-off. Also, it never happended to me, but venturii are pretty prone to icing over, rendering them somewhat useless. As you mentioned only installing an AI, I assume (sincerly hope!) you arn't planning on doing IFR in your 701. While instrument rated, I have never flown a 701 (something I hope to fix soon). I can't imagine it being a good instrument platform, though. If you are putting in the AI for those inadvertant IMC situations, then your purpose might be better served by a TC or a T&B. Almost as easy to use as a AI in such situations. Much cheaper (both to buy and overhaul), and easier to install as they are typically electric. Frank Stutzman