Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:38 AM - The LOC... (Matt Dralle)
2. 03:54 AM - Re: 701 (Lowell Metz)
3. 05:56 AM - Re: Why I chose the XL (Trevor Page)
4. 07:05 AM - Re: 701 (Larry Martin)
5. 07:19 AM - The Zodiac XL vs. RV (The Keeners)
6. 07:35 AM - Re: Vapor lock (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
7. 07:56 AM - Re: The Zodiac XL vs. RV (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
8. 08:02 AM - Re: Why I chose the XL (Mike H)
9. 09:48 AM - Re: The Zodiac XL vs. RV (Crvsecretary@aol.com)
10. 10:15 AM - more on 801 VGs (Keystone Engineering LLC)
11. 10:20 AM - Re: The Zodiac XL vs. RV (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
12. 11:04 AM - Re: The Zodiac XL vs. RV (wizard-24@juno.com)
13. 11:36 AM - Re: The Zodiac XL vs. RV (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
14. 11:39 AM - Re: The Zodiac XL vs. RV (Daniel Vandenberg)
15. 11:40 AM - Re: The Zodiac XL vs. RV (Leo J. Corbalis)
16. 12:00 PM - Re: The Zodiac XL vs. RV (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
17. 12:09 PM - Re: The Zodiac XL vs. RV (wizard-24@juno.com)
18. 12:37 PM - Re: The Zodiac XL vs. RV (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
19. 02:37 PM - Re: Re: Alternator Hum 0.12 HTML_TITLE_EMPTY BODY: 1.68 SUBJ_HAS_SPACES Subject contains lots of white space (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
20. 02:38 PM - A Pilot's Lot (Matt & Jo)
21. 02:47 PM - Stratus E-81/modified heads (Charles Heathco)
22. 02:51 PM - Re: Re: Alternator Hum 0.12 HTML_TITLE_EMPTY BODY: 1.68 SUBJ_HAS_SPACES Subject contains lots of white space (Charles Heathco)
23. 03:25 PM - Re: more on 801 VGs (The Meiste's)
24. 03:33 PM - 801 VG dimension (Rmtnview@aol.com)
25. 03:34 PM - Re: Stratus E-81/modified heads (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
26. 03:47 PM - Re: Stratus E-81/modified heads (Charles Heathco)
27. 04:02 PM - Suburu cooling (Charles Heathco)
28. 04:15 PM - Re: Stratus E-81/modified heads (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
29. 04:27 PM - Re: Stratus E-81/modified heads (JERICKSON03E@aol.com)
30. 04:53 PM - Re: Stratus E-81/modified heads (Charles Heathco)
31. 05:06 PM - Re: 701 (Gary Gower)
32. 05:41 PM - Re: Suburu cooling (Larry McFarland)
33. 06:01 PM - Re: Suburu cooling (Larry Martin)
34. 06:32 PM - Re: Stratus E-81/modified heads (Jim and Lucy)
35. 06:36 PM - Re: Suburu cooling (Michel Therrien)
36. 06:56 PM - Re: Stratus E-81/modified heads (Jim and Lucy)
37. 06:56 PM - Re: The Zodiac XL vs. RV (Gary Gower)
38. 07:11 PM - Re: Stratus E-81/modified heads (Ramperf@aol.com)
39. 07:53 PM - Re: Suburu cooling (Dave Alberti)
40. 08:16 PM - Re: Suburu cooling (Charles Heathco)
41. 08:18 PM - Re: Suburu cooling (Charles Heathco)
42. 08:26 PM - Re: Suburu cooling (Charles Heathco)
43. 08:29 PM - Re: Stratus E-81/modified heads (Charles Heathco)
44. 08:32 PM - Re: Stratus E-81/modified heads (Charles Heathco)
45. 09:37 PM - Re: CH701 Question - Howard Carter (ray.stlaurent@vsea.com)
46. 11:15 PM - Re: Suburu cooling (gary)
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 |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Matt Dralle <dralle@matronics.com>
Hi Listers,
The List of Contributors (LOC) is just around the corner! On December 1st
I post a list of everyone that so generously made a Contribution to support
the Lists. Its sort of my way of publicly thanking everyone that took a
minute to show their appreciation for the Lists.
Won't you take a moment and assure that your name is on that List of
Contributors? As a number of people have pointed out, the List seems at
least, if not a whole lot more, as valuable as a building/flying/recreating
tool as a typical your magazine subscription. We won't even talk about a
newsstand price... :-)
Won't you take minute and assure that your name is on the upcoming
LOC? Tell others that you appreciate the Lists. Making a Contribution to
support the Lists is fast and easy using your Visa or M/C on the SSL Secure
Web Site:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
or by popping a personal check in the mail to:
Matronics Email Lists
c/o Matt Dralle
PO Box 347
Livermore CA 94551-0347
I would like to thank everyone that has so generously made a Contribution
thus far in this year's List Fund Raiser! Remember that its YOUR support
that keeps these Lists going and improving! Don't forget to include a
little comment about how the Lists have helped you! I love to feel the
love... :-)
Best regards,
Matt Dralle
Email List Administrator
Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551
925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle@matronics.com Email
http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft
do not archive
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 |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Lowell Metz" <lowellmetz@earthlink.net>
Paul,
It took me 1,200 hours to complete my 701 to DAR inspection. You could
probably build the plane in 500 hours as advertised but it wouldn't have
paint , engine , or instruments in it. But you could sit in it and make
engine noises and stir the stick.
Down side.... humm.... It will cost you more than you plan.... you will
get frustrated from time to time ...... someone is always telling you what
you did wrong...( they are the ones that have never built a plane )...
I keep my plane tied out within a mile of the gulf in southern Florida.
I don't have the cold to deal with but have the salt air which is worse. I
had a cover made , watch for signs of corrosion , and wash it frequently.
So far so good.
Lowell Metz
DO NOT ARCHIVE
----- Original Message -----
From: <PJK98@aol.com>
Subject: Zenith-List: 701
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: PJK98@aol.com
>
> Hello all,may I ask what is the Real build time of a 701 built form a
> kit,and if there any down sides to this plane,thinking about starting one
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: Why I chose the XL |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Trevor Page <webmaster@upac.ca>
I'm going to be operating my 601HD as an advanced ultralight (Canada)
and in the ultralight circle the Challenger guys are the same way as
the RV guys ;)
Trevor Page
601HD 98% complete
DO NOT ARCHIVE
On Nov 21, 2004, at 10:19 PM, Mike H wrote:
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Mike H" <mhilderbrand@cox.net>
>
> The RVator's around here love their aircraft, as they should, it is a
> fine
> bird. Your right, many are closed minded when it comes to other a/c.
> Everyone has different taste and needs, and like Matt said, different
> flying
> abilities. I'm trying to decide on the Zodiac or the RV9. At this
> stage in
> my life the Zodiac will be more practical for my type of flying ,
> along with
> the quicker build time, and simpler design.
> Mike
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 |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
Paul, so far I have about 600 hours in mine and expect to have another 400
when all is said and done. I've heard it takes about 1500 total hours of
which about half will be figuring out how to actually do the other half. It
all depends on your ability to comprehend the instructions/drawings. And of
course you own skills will play a large part. Check the archives, cause
there is a lot on tools which you will need and other building related items
there. You will need a 12' perfectly flat table, it doesn't have to be
level just flat. Measure three times, cut once, they don't give you spares.
Take Care, Larry N1345L
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lowell Metz" <lowellmetz@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 701
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Lowell Metz"
<lowellmetz@earthlink.net>
>
> Paul,
> It took me 1,200 hours to complete my 701 to DAR inspection. You
could
> probably build the plane in 500 hours as advertised but it wouldn't have
> paint , engine , or instruments in it. But you could sit in it and make
> engine noises and stir the stick.
> Down side.... humm.... It will cost you more than you plan.... you will
> get frustrated from time to time ...... someone is always telling you
what
> you did wrong...( they are the ones that have never built a plane )...
> I keep my plane tied out within a mile of the gulf in southern
Florida.
> I don't have the cold to deal with but have the salt air which is worse.
I
> had a cover made , watch for signs of corrosion , and wash it frequently.
> So far so good.
>
> Lowell Metz
> DO NOT ARCHIVE
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <PJK98@aol.com>
> To: <zenith-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Zenith-List: 701
>
>
> > --> Zenith-List message posted by: PJK98@aol.com
> >
> > Hello all,may I ask what is the Real build time of a 701 built form a
> > kit,and if there any down sides to this plane,thinking about starting
one
>
>
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: | The Zodiac XL vs. RV |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "The Keeners" <kim.forest@surewest.net>
I'm quoting someone else here:
Even if you finish your Zodiac 200 hours before the RV builder (and that's a conservative
estimate) and your Zodiac flies at 120knots (should be no problem with
a Jabiru) you could fly around the world before that RV builder even starts
his engine!!!!
They'll have 24,000 miles of catching up to do.
I work with a guy who flies an RV4. I weigh 205 and he can't even take me flying
because of weight and balance. If my XL was flying, I could take us both on
a long cross country. The RV6/7/8 have rectified this, but even the RV7's cockpit
is narrower than the XL!
One proud (and obviously biased) XL fan.
Forest K.
Table complete - starter kit started
N601FK Reserved
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 |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Good morning Don,
I was making an assumption in my reply below that may have been
incorrect but it is an important distinction and that is the one of the
header tank. I did not think the CH640 had a header tank so my reply was
based on that assumption.
So to point it out to those that don't know (and my brush off my warning
without delving into the issue)...
A plane with a header tank is a very different animal than one with just
wing tanks because the pump inlet will almost certainly provide positive
head over the inlet to a firwall mounted pump.
For this reason, even if you are sucking fuel thru a length of pipe it
is almost certainly OK.... For this reason a firall mounted pump with a
heat muff is probably just fine.
If you are lifting (sucking) fuel from a wing tank that is a very
different deal and firewall mounted pumps are extremly risky, both due
to potential heat (heating fuel makes higher vapour pressure) and
sucking uphill from the wing tanks.
If you think I'm full of it (lots of folks do...:)..) note that when I
was interested in a certain Subaru ackage for my RV project I noted the
designer had both pumps on the firwall with wing tanks....I whined and
bitched and got ignored.
Guess what happened to one of this company's customers two months
later...Yup engine quit on take off and down it went...Eventually lo and
behold they put it down to Vapour lock!
I now note that six months after I pointed out the error the pumps are
now inside the cabin!
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Don Walker
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Vapor lock
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Don Walker" <d3dw@msn.com>
+++ Or you could just look at the firewall of almost any Piper low-wing
+++ and copy that. It's a box/surround made of aluminum that blocks
+++ direct heat from other engine major thermal producers.
Tony Bingelis' books on engines go into detail on just such heat
blockers.
This has worked fine for me for 345 hours. Mine is mounted on the
firewall within only several inches from the tank so it doesn't have far
to suck fuel. In fact it is below it so it is gravity feed. (header
tank)The main protection is the heat muff around the muffler for cabin
heat, and then the use of insulating sleeves around the fuel line. No
trouble yet in the Texas heat. It also keeps the oil temperature below
190 degrees even in the hottest summer. Don walker HDS TD
----- Original Message -----
From: Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)<mailto:frank.hinde@hp.com>
To: zenith-list@matronics.com<mailto:zenith-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 2:42 PM
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Vapor lock
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)"
<frank.hinde@hp.com<mailto:frank.hinde@hp.com>>
That will help, but even better (especially on a low wing plane) to
put
it right at the outlet of each fuel tank....The less length of line
you
have to suck through the less likleyhood of VL...
On my new IO360 Motor I am plannig to ditch the mechanical fuel pump
and
put electric pumps like I described above. No reason not to do this
on
any other motor, except you junk the mechanical fuel pump...Not an
issue
with a soob because there isn't one...
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From:
owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com<mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@m
atronics.com>
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff
Small
To: zenith-list@matronics.com<mailto:zenith-list@matronics.com>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Vapor lock
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Jeff Small"
<zodiacjeff@msn.com<mailto:zodiacjeff@msn.com>>
The fuel boost pump should have been mounted inside the cabin area so
as
to keep it away from heat. The fuel was being heated and then turning
to vapor which in turn caused the engine to sputter. So, plan ahead
and
make room for your fuel boost pump under the seat area or some other
place inside the cabin area.
+++ Or you could just look at the firewall of almost any Piper
low-wing
+++ and copy that. It's a box/surround made of aluminum that blocks
+++ direct heat from other engine major thermal producers.
Tony Bingelis' books on engines go into detail on just such heat
blockers.
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: | The Zodiac XL vs. RV |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Aren't personal preference arguments so much fun?...:)
So I built An HDS and an about to start on an RV-7A...As you can imagine
my selection process was a little different second time round (a bit
like a second marriage in fact...:)..).
The 601 is a very capable little plane, I have enjoyed it immensley but
I thought you might be interested in a couple of other insights.
1) The 601 has a pretty stout main landing gear. There is one strip
where we went for our backpacking honeymoon and it was so rough I really
don't think taking an RV in there is an option.
2) 601HDS has very good short field performance...(HD should be better)
3) low altitude climb is very good...Not so good as weight goes up but
that is probably true of the RV too?
4) With a heavy engine the amount of stuff you can get into an HD(s) is
probably a little more than you can get into an RV and the weight behind
the seats is limited to 100lbs...More than the 601 yes, but remember
there are no wing lockers on an RV.
5) Quality of the kit...No comparison here...Its almost impossible to
buid a bad RV
6) Cross country cruise....This was the biggest dissappointment right
from the first flight. Even after 348 hours I'm still frustrated.
7) Altitude performance. Nobody mentions this but in an area of the
country that has large pointy things its pretty important. The 601 HDS
climbs very slowly at altitude and at gross weight is really limited to
9000 feet density altitude. Now before everyone gets upset I'n not
saying it won't fly higher...It will but it takes longer to get there
and many is the time I have pushed towards a ridge line with clenched
teeth hoping for a bit more height...I have RV friends who have not only
scorched past me in level flight they get higher faster and in the real
world this is a big deal.
8) comparing a tandem aircraft with a side by side on W&B is really an
unfair comparison. The side by side will always win....Just get a ride
in a 7! I think the cockpit is an inch narrower?....Not an issue for me
at 150lbs but I could see that extra 1/2" might be an issue challenged
in this area.
9) If you weigh 205 and you live near mountains then see section 7
above...:)
10) Considering IFR in a 601....your a braver man than I.
The botton line is they really are different airplanes. The 601 is low
budget low performance machine that is quicker to build. I have no
delusions that my Dodge Neon compared to my neighbors 500SL Mercedes
however....I'll just blast past him in the RV....:)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of The Keeners
Subject: Zenith-List: The Zodiac XL vs. RV
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "The Keeners"
--> <kim.forest@surewest.net>
I'm quoting someone else here:
Even if you finish your Zodiac 200 hours before the RV builder (and
that's a conservative estimate) and your Zodiac flies at 120knots
(should be no problem with a Jabiru) you could fly around the world
before that RV builder even starts his engine!!!! They'll have 24,000
miles of catching up to do.
I work with a guy who flies an RV4. I weigh 205 and he can't even take
me flying because of weight and balance. If my XL was flying, I could
take us both on a long cross country. The RV6/7/8 have rectified this,
but even the RV7's cockpit is narrower than the XL!
One proud (and obviously biased) XL fan.
Forest K.
Table complete - starter kit started
N601FK Reserved
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: Why I chose the XL |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Mike H" <mhilderbrand@cox.net>
Hey now, I am curretly a challenger driver! :) The XL is next on my list.
Mike
----- Original Message -----
From: "Trevor Page" <webmaster@upac.ca>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Why I chose the XL
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: Trevor Page <webmaster@upac.ca>
>
> I'm going to be operating my 601HD as an advanced ultralight (Canada)
> and in the ultralight circle the Challenger guys are the same way as
> the RV guys ;)
>
> Trevor Page
> 601HD 98% complete
>
> DO NOT ARCHIVE
>
>
> On Nov 21, 2004, at 10:19 PM, Mike H wrote:
>
> > --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Mike H" <mhilderbrand@cox.net>
> >
> > The RVator's around here love their aircraft, as they should, it is a
> > fine
> > bird. Your right, many are closed minded when it comes to other a/c.
> > Everyone has different taste and needs, and like Matt said, different
> > flying
> > abilities. I'm trying to decide on the Zodiac or the RV9. At this
> > stage in
> > my life the Zodiac will be more practical for my type of flying ,
> > along with
> > the quicker build time, and simpler design.
> > Mike
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: | The Zodiac XL vs. RV |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Crvsecretary@aol.com
Hello Frank:
I am very interested in hearing about your observations in the 601 shortcomings...it's
easy to br critical to the competition, but it's a lot toughfer to be
critical to "our choice", and I welcome your thoughts on:
5) Kit quality: do you believe it is possible to build a bad Zodiac asopposed to
building a bad RV? Is this due to the 'critical mass' of RV builders out there...there
is more advise available? I know this is true at my local EAA chapter.
6) Cross-country cruise - what am I missing here? Where do you find the shortcomings?
7) Altitude performance - what engine are you running in the HDS? Can this be
the difference from the RV? My observation is the 601 horsepower range tops out
where the RV series just start!!
10) IFR capability - even though I have no plans on going IFR, what are your thoughts?
Thanks very much !!
Tracy
do not archive
In a message dated 11/22/2004 10:55:29 AM Eastern Standard Time, "Hinde, Frank
George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com> writes:
>--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
>
>Aren't personal preference arguments so much fun?...:)
>
>So I built An HDS and an about to start on an RV-7A...As you can imagine
>my selection process was a little different second time round (a bit
>like a second marriage in fact...:)..).
>
>The 601 is a very capable little plane, I have enjoyed it immensley but
>I thought you might be interested in a couple of other insights.
>
>1) The 601 has a pretty stout main landing gear. There is one strip
>where we went for our backpacking honeymoon and it was so rough I really
>don't think taking an RV in there is an option.
>
>2) 601HDS has very good short field performance...(HD should be better)
>
>3) low altitude climb is very good...Not so good as weight goes up but
>that is probably true of the RV too?
>
>4) With a heavy engine the amount of stuff you can get into an HD(s) is
>probably a little more than you can get into an RV and the weight behind
>the seats is limited to 100lbs...More than the 601 yes, but remember
>there are no wing lockers on an RV.
>
>5) Quality of the kit...No comparison here...Its almost impossible to
>buid a bad RV
>
>6) Cross country cruise....This was the biggest dissappointment right
>from the first flight. Even after 348 hours I'm still frustrated.
>
>7) Altitude performance. Nobody mentions this but in an area of the
>country that has large pointy things its pretty important. The 601 HDS
>climbs very slowly at altitude and at gross weight is really limited to
>9000 feet density altitude. Now before everyone gets upset I'n not
>saying it won't fly higher...It will but it takes longer to get there
>and many is the time I have pushed towards a ridge line with clenched
>teeth hoping for a bit more height...I have RV friends who have not only
>scorched past me in level flight they get higher faster and in the real
>world this is a big deal.
>
>8) comparing a tandem aircraft with a side by side on W&B is really an
>unfair comparison. The side by side will always win....Just get a ride
>in a 7! I think the cockpit is an inch narrower?....Not an issue for me
>at 150lbs but I could see that extra 1/2" might be an issue challenged
>in this area.
>
>9) If you weigh 205 and you live near mountains then see section 7
>above...:)
>
>10) Considering IFR in a 601....your a braver man than I.
>
>The botton line is they really are different airplanes. The 601 is low
>budget low performance machine that is quicker to build. I have no
>delusions that my Dodge Neon compared to my neighbors 500SL Mercedes
>however....I'll just blast past him in the RV....:)
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of The Keeners
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Zenith-List: The Zodiac XL vs. RV
>
>
>--> Zenith-List message posted by: "The Keeners"
>--> <kim.forest@surewest.net>
>
>I'm quoting someone else here:
>Even if you finish your Zodiac 200 hours before the RV builder (and
>that's a conservative estimate) and your Zodiac flies at 120knots
>(should be no problem with a Jabiru) you could fly around the world
>before that RV builder even starts his engine!!!! They'll have 24,000
>miles of catching up to do.
>
>I work with a guy who flies an RV4. I weigh 205 and he can't even take
>me flying because of weight and balance. If my XL was flying, I could
>take us both on a long cross country. The RV6/7/8 have rectified this,
>but even the RV7's cockpit is narrower than the XL!
>
>One proud (and obviously biased) XL fan.
>Forest K.
>Table complete - starter kit started
>N601FK Reserved
>
>
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 |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Keystone Engineering LLC <keystone@gci.net>
I probably use my 801 for a different type of flying than most. I love to fly
out the beaches on the Gulf of Alaska. After a landing at low tide you taxi
up the beach at 45 degree angle until it gets soft then you turn around to face
down the beach. You want to get the plane high enough to be above high tide.
Normally the two normally happen about the same place. When you want to leave
you are facing down hill.. When I'm ready to leave I wish I were able to
lighten the load on the nose wheel with power. This way you can power out of
the soft sand without tearing up the prop.
With that said I made VGs from standard L and installed them on the horizontal
stabilizer. I now have more elevator control. I like the VGs enough that they
will remain on the 801. I previously made a much smaller set and they were
did not make enough of an improvement to keep them on. Would I like more elevator
control, yes! I asked ZAC how much difference it makes along with a number
of other questions but have not received an answer yet. I suspect I will
build and install the new horizontal tail. If I want more elevator I will install
VGs on the new tail. I'm still trying to figure the down side, no change
in cruise speed, more control on the bottom end and they are really cheap and
easy to install!
In terms of performance increase the nose will now rise at 20 mph or so. With
this improvement you can roll along with the nose wheel off the ground until you
get enough speed to fly. I don't think you can land it any slower. If you
do not have enough elevator while landing add a little power. If you land slow
the nose wheel still thumps. If you carry a little more speed on landing you
can keep the nose wheel thumping. I'm not sure what else I can tell you.
I'm happy with the performance from the O-360. If I'm getting out in a couple
of hundred of feet and that is more performance than I really need. I still live
by a rule a very wise person (my wife) asked me to follow. Have twice as
much room as you need. That way if you are not up to par, the plane is not up
to par or the goddess of lift leaves... you and the plane are still in one piece.
Bill Wilcox
N801BW
Valdez, AK 99686
140 hrs
----- Original Message -----
From: Rmtnview@aol.com
To: keystone@gci.net
Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 6:45 AM
Subject: Re: Fw: VG's
I just went back and found Bill Wilcox's note on his VG installation on the 801
tail. My question is therefore for Bill, but I'm posting it here so others
my benefit. Bill, you said you were satisfied with the results, but, you were
still going to put the new, wider hori stab on your bird and THEN put the VG's
on the new tail. Do you not think the VG's improved slow speed performance enough
to stay with the original tail? Can you expound on your performance increase?
What difference did you notice? I would like to continue with the original
tail if not too impractical. I'll not be putting anything heavier than a lyc
or XP-360 (lyc) on the nose. I'm also looking hard at the Eggenfellner soob,
but that would be the heaviest of my options. Thanks, rog
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: | The Zodiac XL vs. RV |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Oh dear you really are trying to make me unpopular...:)
5) No it is not due to advise, the kit quality as far, far ...FAR!
Better in the RV...Just about ALL of the holes in an RV7/9 are pre
punched...You simply assemble the airframe with clecos and its it
perfectly straight. Of course there is more prep with solid rivets
(drill to size, dimple, prime and rivet) but all the rivets are already
in exactly the right place for you. By comparison on my HDS kit it
looked more like a set of drwings and a pile of sheet metal!...Even the
holes that were drilled at the factory I wished they hadn't...My rivet
lines are striaght...the ones in the kit were not.
But most of the holes you have to drill yourself which means the plane
has to be jigged properly (mostly a flat table) but I know of planes
that are built with a curve in the fusalage....Not mine, but it took me
a lot longer to build it right too....950 hours. So yes its very EASY to
build a bad zodiac, I have seen amny that just look shabby.
6) Its slow and ZAC wildly exagerates their claims...Top speed of my
plane it about 125mph with 100HP. Not the 140mph cruise on only
80HP...BIG diference! Now do I think I could make my plane
faster?...Sure, others have but you certainly won't be doing that unless
you spend HUNDREDS of extra hours cutting the nose off the cowl and
making it fit correctly. RV's I am told make their claimed performance
numbers right out the box!...Once again big difference. In any case even
a 115HP RV-9 will be cruising at 150+mph.
7) All naturally aspirated engines lose power at the same rate for
increase in density altitude...I have 100HP at sea level (guessing but
my prop pitch and take off RPM's confirm very similar numbers). But yes
partly a higher HP engine will continue to make more power at altitude..
I think the HDS wing is a little small...Certainly the RV wings LOOK
bigger and make less drag, which is the real reason why they fly faster.
8) The HDS is way to twitchy for IFR...But that's just me...Maybe with
an autopilot it might be acceptable.
Frank
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Crvsecretary@aol.com
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: The Zodiac XL vs. RV
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Crvsecretary@aol.com
Hello Frank:
I am very interested in hearing about your observations in the 601
shortcomings...it's easy to br critical to the competition, but it's a
lot toughfer to be critical to "our choice", and I welcome your thoughts
on:
5) Kit quality: do you believe it is possible to build a bad Zodiac
asopposed to building a bad RV? Is this due to the 'critical mass' of
RV builders out there...there is more advise available? I know this is
true at my local EAA chapter.
6) Cross-country cruise - what am I missing here? Where do you find the
shortcomings?
7) Altitude performance - what engine are you running in the HDS? Can
this be the difference from the RV? My observation is the 601
horsepower range tops out where the RV series just start!!
10) IFR capability - even though I have no plans on going IFR, what are
your thoughts?
Thanks very much !!
Tracy
do not archive
In a message dated 11/22/2004 10:55:29 AM Eastern Standard Time, "Hinde,
Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com> writes:
>--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)"
>--> <frank.hinde@hp.com>
>
>Aren't personal preference arguments so much fun?...:)
>
>So I built An HDS and an about to start on an RV-7A...As you can
>imagine my selection process was a little different second time round
>(a bit like a second marriage in fact...:)..).
>
>The 601 is a very capable little plane, I have enjoyed it immensley but
>I thought you might be interested in a couple of other insights.
>
>1) The 601 has a pretty stout main landing gear. There is one strip
>where we went for our backpacking honeymoon and it was so rough I
>really don't think taking an RV in there is an option.
>
>2) 601HDS has very good short field performance...(HD should be better)
>
>3) low altitude climb is very good...Not so good as weight goes up but
>that is probably true of the RV too?
>
>4) With a heavy engine the amount of stuff you can get into an HD(s) is
>probably a little more than you can get into an RV and the weight
>behind the seats is limited to 100lbs...More than the 601 yes, but
>remember there are no wing lockers on an RV.
>
>5) Quality of the kit...No comparison here...Its almost impossible to
>buid a bad RV
>
>6) Cross country cruise....This was the biggest dissappointment right
>from the first flight. Even after 348 hours I'm still frustrated.
>
>7) Altitude performance. Nobody mentions this but in an area of the
>country that has large pointy things its pretty important. The 601 HDS
>climbs very slowly at altitude and at gross weight is really limited to
>9000 feet density altitude. Now before everyone gets upset I'n not
>saying it won't fly higher...It will but it takes longer to get there
>and many is the time I have pushed towards a ridge line with clenched
>teeth hoping for a bit more height...I have RV friends who have not
>only scorched past me in level flight they get higher faster and in the
>real world this is a big deal.
>
>8) comparing a tandem aircraft with a side by side on W&B is really an
>unfair comparison. The side by side will always win....Just get a ride
>in a 7! I think the cockpit is an inch narrower?....Not an issue for me
>at 150lbs but I could see that extra 1/2" might be an issue challenged
>in this area.
>
>9) If you weigh 205 and you live near mountains then see section 7
>above...:)
>
>10) Considering IFR in a 601....your a braver man than I.
>
>The botton line is they really are different airplanes. The 601 is low
>budget low performance machine that is quicker to build. I have no
>delusions that my Dodge Neon compared to my neighbors 500SL Mercedes
>however....I'll just blast past him in the RV....:)
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of The
>Keeners
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Zenith-List: The Zodiac XL vs. RV
>
>
>--> Zenith-List message posted by: "The Keeners"
>--> <kim.forest@surewest.net>
>
>I'm quoting someone else here:
>Even if you finish your Zodiac 200 hours before the RV builder (and
>that's a conservative estimate) and your Zodiac flies at 120knots
>(should be no problem with a Jabiru) you could fly around the world
>before that RV builder even starts his engine!!!! They'll have 24,000
>miles of catching up to do.
>
>I work with a guy who flies an RV4. I weigh 205 and he can't even take
>me flying because of weight and balance. If my XL was flying, I could
>take us both on a long cross country. The RV6/7/8 have rectified this,
>but even the RV7's cockpit is narrower than the XL!
>
>One proud (and obviously biased) XL fan.
>Forest K.
>Table complete - starter kit started
>N601FK Reserved
>
>
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: The Zodiac XL vs. RV |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: wizard-24@juno.com
Since someone else started this thread, guess I'll jump in too. :)
Another consideration is resale value. No comparison between the two.
Insurability could be another factor, but I haven't gotten to that point
yet.
My summary comment would be that if you plan on using a certified engine
for either plane (in which case the total cost for both planes would be
about the same), and if build time isn't a huge issue, go with the RV.
If you plan to use an inexpensive auto conversion powerplant (thus making
the 601 much cheaper), and want something a little quicker to build, then
go with the 601XL.
The only other consideration might be if you face the possibility of
losing your medical some day soon, then going with the 601XL may be a
better choice, since it qualifies for the sport pilot rule.
Either way, it's great to have choices!
Mike Fortunato
601XL
Sign up for Juno Today at http://www.juno.com!
Look for special offers at Best Buy stores.
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: | The Zodiac XL vs. RV |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
An inexpensive what?...
If your talking about building up your own engine conversion and are
willing to sacrifice time (and a certain amout of risk) for reduced
money then maybe your conversion will be inexpensive.
If you are talking about buying a converted power plant then it is not
inexpensive and may still end up costing you a bundle of both time and
money...Note my Stratus almost self detructed 3 times!
As to insurability, I can tell you from experience that insurance
compaies get real nervous (read it costs you more or they simply won't
insure you) unless it says, Rotax, Jabiru or Lycoming on the application
form. Remember there are only 2 or 3 insurance companies.
Frank
Do not archive.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
wizard-24@juno.com
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: The Zodiac XL vs. RV
--> Zenith-List message posted by: wizard-24@juno.com
Since someone else started this thread, guess I'll jump in too. :)
Another consideration is resale value. No comparison between the two.
Insurability could be another factor, but I haven't gotten to that point
yet.
My summary comment would be that if you plan on using a certified engine
for either plane (in which case the total cost for both planes would be
about the same), and if build time isn't a huge issue, go with the RV.
If you plan to use an inexpensive auto conversion powerplant (thus
making the 601 much cheaper), and want something a little quicker to
build, then go with the 601XL.
The only other consideration might be if you face the possibility of
losing your medical some day soon, then going with the 601XL may be a
better choice, since it qualifies for the sport pilot rule.
Either way, it's great to have choices!
Mike Fortunato
601XL
Sign up for Juno Today at http://www.juno.com!
Look for special offers at Best Buy stores.
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 |
|
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;
b=SYKzBqTmzzvHAx5OQsiXlzk5wZ1m4vc2EdLr4FxAt2pqyHEnwaID7Mz3MR0DcHEc9YBcunAc9g9EOaD2y9HlSwghfKL9fP403JDWbTewR9giJjtFz8Q/1IxK5sgzUxQv9tOaWAp1vcFDGPIVzH2uHn0GuNAITHqUTG1u9gc+aIw=
;
| Subject: | Re: The Zodiac XL vs. RV |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Daniel Vandenberg <djvdb63@yahoo.com>
Listers...
I just HAVE to respond to this topic. This comes up every few months on the Zenith
list...and I have commented before on this list about the topic, as have
many others. I have decided to build the RV-9A...I think. But I am having trouble
letting go of the XL idea because I like it so much. There is obviously
no correct answer here.
With regard to difficulty of building and time of building, I would agree that
the Zodiac XL represents a more simple project and probably fewer hours. But
my sense is, not by much. I agree with Frank Hinde that the CNC pre-punched nature
of the recent RV kits is a HUGE factor in their favor...not only greatly
reducing build-time, but also ensuring higher quaility in the finished product.
The value of the kits, to my analysis, goes toward the RV. The current RV-9A kit
lists for $17,440 for the slow-build kit. The XL for $15,890. This is a difference
of $1,550 greater cost for the RV...ignoring shipping costs. In return
you get a pre-punched kit that will become an aircraft with substantially
greater cross-country speed, much better resale value, and equally good slow-speed
and short field capacities. With the same engine for comparison (Lyc O-235),
the RV-9A should be 22-23 kt faster at cruise if you believe the manufacturer's
claims for both planes. And of course you have the option of installing
an O-320 if you can afford it...and keeping up with your average Bonanza.
I have never been comfortable with the lack of rollover protection on the Zodiac
series. That big plastic bubble just looks like it would collapse on my head
if I ever ended up inverted on the ground. Sebastian Heintz told me that Zodiacs
rarely, if ever, end up inverted, but I am leary of this. Perhaps this
is also a weakness of the RV series...since the tricycle RV series seems to frequently
end up upside-down after forced landings.
Obviously the XL can be built from plans, and uses pulled rivets...both features
not available on the RV. This is an obvious advantage for some builders. Also,
the Zenith is a much less common airplane...so the exclusivity factor is
in their favor, since RV's are so common as to draw little attention to themselves
anymore.
Here is a little discussed aspect that tipped me toward the RV-9A: I like the
upright seating position better. The XL uses a laid-back, supine seating position
in order to reduce cockpit height and hence reduce frontal area...something
that is obviously common in experimental birds. Having sat in the XL prototype
several times (I am 6'1" and with a long torso) I found it comfortable overall...but
dislike having to crane my neck forward to see over the nose. Granted...the
overall visibility from a Zodiac is absolutely fabulous.
Yes...it is fun to have the choice. What a country we live in....
Dan
The Keeners <kim.forest@surewest.net> wrote:
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "The Keeners"
I'm quoting someone else here:
Even if you finish your Zodiac 200 hours before the RV builder (and that's a conservative
estimate) and your Zodiac flies at 120knots (should be no problem with
a Jabiru) you could fly around the world before that RV builder even starts
his engine!!!!
They'll have 24,000 miles of catching up to do.
I work with a guy who flies an RV4. I weigh 205 and he can't even take me flying
because of weight and balance. If my XL was flying, I could take us both on
a long cross country. The RV6/7/8 have rectified this, but even the RV7's cockpit
is narrower than the XL!
One proud (and obviously biased) XL fan.
Forest K.
Table complete - starter kit started
N601FK Reserved
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: | Re: The Zodiac XL vs. RV |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Leo J. Corbalis" <leocorbalis@sbcglobal.net>
Just for fun let me stick in my oar. Ihave a 601HDS TD. 80 hp ROTAX. I have
a WOODCOMP inflight adjustable prop. This makes a real differience in
takeoff , climb and cruise. Solo climb 1000fpm, cruise 120 knots at 5000 ft
and 5500 rpm. I usually cruise at 5200rpm at 105k. The highest I've climbed
is 8500 ft at 500 fpm.
If some deluded rvator bugs you just ask him How much he pays for gas per
hour on a hamburger run ?
Leo Corbalis
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: The Zodiac XL vs. RV
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)"
<frank.hinde@hp.com>
>
> Aren't personal preference arguments so much fun?...:)
>
> So I built An HDS and an about to start on an RV-7A...As you can imagine
> my selection process was a little different second time round (a bit
> like a second marriage in fact...:)..).
>
> The 601 is a very capable little plane, I have enjoyed it immensley but
> I thought you might be interested in a couple of other insights.
>
> 1) The 601 has a pretty stout main landing gear. There is one strip
> where we went for our backpacking honeymoon and it was so rough I really
> don't think taking an RV in there is an option.
>
> 2) 601HDS has very good short field performance...(HD should be better)
>
> 3) low altitude climb is very good...Not so good as weight goes up but
> that is probably true of the RV too?
>
> 4) With a heavy engine the amount of stuff you can get into an HD(s) is
> probably a little more than you can get into an RV and the weight behind
> the seats is limited to 100lbs...More than the 601 yes, but remember
> there are no wing lockers on an RV.
>
> 5) Quality of the kit...No comparison here...Its almost impossible to
> buid a bad RV
>
> 6) Cross country cruise....This was the biggest dissappointment right
> from the first flight. Even after 348 hours I'm still frustrated.
>
> 7) Altitude performance. Nobody mentions this but in an area of the
> country that has large pointy things its pretty important. The 601 HDS
> climbs very slowly at altitude and at gross weight is really limited to
> 9000 feet density altitude. Now before everyone gets upset I'n not
> saying it won't fly higher...It will but it takes longer to get there
> and many is the time I have pushed towards a ridge line with clenched
> teeth hoping for a bit more height...I have RV friends who have not only
> scorched past me in level flight they get higher faster and in the real
> world this is a big deal.
>
> 8) comparing a tandem aircraft with a side by side on W&B is really an
> unfair comparison. The side by side will always win....Just get a ride
> in a 7! I think the cockpit is an inch narrower?....Not an issue for me
> at 150lbs but I could see that extra 1/2" might be an issue challenged
> in this area.
>
> 9) If you weigh 205 and you live near mountains then see section 7
> above...:)
>
> 10) Considering IFR in a 601....your a braver man than I.
>
> The botton line is they really are different airplanes. The 601 is low
> budget low performance machine that is quicker to build. I have no
> delusions that my Dodge Neon compared to my neighbors 500SL Mercedes
> however....I'll just blast past him in the RV....:)
>
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: | The Zodiac XL vs. RV |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
He burns twice as much fuel but he goes twice as fast!
200mph at 10 GPH (I believe that is what the more modern Lycoming clones
are burning) is not bad...Most of them you really can burn Premium
autogas in now as well.
I don't think fuel costs are much different on this basis.
Frank
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Leo J.
Corbalis
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: The Zodiac XL vs. RV
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Leo J. Corbalis"
--> <leocorbalis@sbcglobal.net>
Just for fun let me stick in my oar. Ihave a 601HDS TD. 80 hp ROTAX. I
have a WOODCOMP inflight adjustable prop. This makes a real differience
in takeoff , climb and cruise. Solo climb 1000fpm, cruise 120 knots at
5000 ft and 5500 rpm. I usually cruise at 5200rpm at 105k. The highest
I've climbed is 8500 ft at 500 fpm.
If some deluded rvator bugs you just ask him How much he pays for gas
per hour on a hamburger run ? Leo Corbalis do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: The Zodiac XL vs. RV
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)"
<frank.hinde@hp.com>
>
> Aren't personal preference arguments so much fun?...:)
>
> So I built An HDS and an about to start on an RV-7A...As you can
> imagine my selection process was a little different second time round
> (a bit like a second marriage in fact...:)..).
>
> The 601 is a very capable little plane, I have enjoyed it immensley
> but I thought you might be interested in a couple of other insights.
>
> 1) The 601 has a pretty stout main landing gear. There is one strip
> where we went for our backpacking honeymoon and it was so rough I
> really don't think taking an RV in there is an option.
>
> 2) 601HDS has very good short field performance...(HD should be
> better)
>
> 3) low altitude climb is very good...Not so good as weight goes up but
> that is probably true of the RV too?
>
> 4) With a heavy engine the amount of stuff you can get into an HD(s)
> is probably a little more than you can get into an RV and the weight
> behind the seats is limited to 100lbs...More than the 601 yes, but
> remember there are no wing lockers on an RV.
>
> 5) Quality of the kit...No comparison here...Its almost impossible to
> buid a bad RV
>
> 6) Cross country cruise....This was the biggest dissappointment right
> from the first flight. Even after 348 hours I'm still frustrated.
>
> 7) Altitude performance. Nobody mentions this but in an area of the
> country that has large pointy things its pretty important. The 601 HDS
> climbs very slowly at altitude and at gross weight is really limited
> to 9000 feet density altitude. Now before everyone gets upset I'n not
> saying it won't fly higher...It will but it takes longer to get there
> and many is the time I have pushed towards a ridge line with clenched
> teeth hoping for a bit more height...I have RV friends who have not
> only scorched past me in level flight they get higher faster and in
> the real world this is a big deal.
>
> 8) comparing a tandem aircraft with a side by side on W&B is really an
> unfair comparison. The side by side will always win....Just get a ride
> in a 7! I think the cockpit is an inch narrower?....Not an issue for
> me at 150lbs but I could see that extra 1/2" might be an issue
> challenged in this area.
>
> 9) If you weigh 205 and you live near mountains then see section 7
> above...:)
>
> 10) Considering IFR in a 601....your a braver man than I.
>
> The botton line is they really are different airplanes. The 601 is low
> budget low performance machine that is quicker to build. I have no
> delusions that my Dodge Neon compared to my neighbors 500SL Mercedes
> however....I'll just blast past him in the RV....:)
>
Message 17
| 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 Zodiac XL vs. RV |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: wizard-24@juno.com
> An inexpensive what?...
>
> If your talking about building up your own engine conversion and
> are willing to sacrifice time (and a certain amout of risk) for reduced
> money then maybe your conversion will be inexpensive.
>
> If you are talking about buying a converted power plant then it is
> not inexpensive and may still end up costing you a bundle of both time
> and money...Note my Stratus almost self detructed 3 times!
Everything is relative, but no matter if you build your own auto
conversion, or you buy one that is already converted, you'll still save
money vs. a certified aircraft engine. In fact, if you build your own,
you'll likely save a truckload of money. My Corvair conversion will be
about $4K in total....compare that to $15 - $17K or so for a certified
setup. Maybe $10K+ isn't much to some folks, but to me it's a lot! And
that's not just in the acquisition costs -- it's also in the maintenance
& repair costs down the road.
As a disclaimer......If not for the money savings, I would definitely
have chosen a Jabiru 3300 for my 601XL. It's a sweet engine, and the
installation seems relatively straight forward. But then again, if I were
to spend that kind of money, I might have considered building an RV
instead.
As for reliability -- that's a separate issue altogether and builders
need to reconcile that themselves. But this discussion centered purely on
economics, assuming both engine type choices to be equally reliable. (the
Stratus situation is another story....)
Mike Fortunato
do not archive
Sign up for Juno Today at http://www.juno.com!
Look for special offers at Best Buy stores.
Message 18
| 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 Zodiac XL vs. RV |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Hmmm...I think you point is partly true, but I wonder if we are
comparing apples to oranges here.
E.g there is a low cost subaru conversion that looks very attractive
cost wise in the 180HP range...However the same (ish) engine package
from Eggenfellner looks to cost about the same as an experimental LYC
(the Lycoming clones make experimental engines which are the same as
certified...just not certified which makes MUCH cheaper...Not made by
Lycoming either).
The word on the street is the Egg engine is top quality, the lower cost
package looks the same on paper but is nowere near as good.
In other words in converted auto packages there are good (expensive)
ones and others that look cheaper...The Stratus looked pretty cheap
right up until it dropped the first valve guide!...So reliability is
simply not a separate issue from cost, it does figure into ecomomics.
The plain fact is you are biting off more risk with an auto conversion,
that risk shows up as cost saving. If the dice roll against you, you
might end up paying a lot more.
As far as obtaining an engine for an XL or RV9 there is a lot of logic
in buying a part used o235....When worn out buy another one.
This is from a guy who 5 years ago thought he could do MUCH better than
buying a Lyc.
Frank
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
wizard-24@juno.com
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: The Zodiac XL vs. RV
--> Zenith-List message posted by: wizard-24@juno.com
> An inexpensive what?...
>
> If your talking about building up your own engine conversion and
> are willing to sacrifice time (and a certain amout of risk) for
reduced
> money then maybe your conversion will be inexpensive.
>
> If you are talking about buying a converted power plant then it is
> not inexpensive and may still end up costing you a bundle of both time
> and money...Note my Stratus almost self detructed 3 times!
Everything is relative, but no matter if you build your own auto
conversion, or you buy one that is already converted, you'll still save
money vs. a certified aircraft engine. In fact, if you build your own,
you'll likely save a truckload of money. My Corvair conversion will be
about $4K in total....compare that to $15 - $17K or so for a certified
setup. Maybe $10K+ isn't much to some folks, but to me it's a lot! And
that's not just in the acquisition costs -- it's also in the maintenance
& repair costs down the road.
As a disclaimer......If not for the money savings, I would definitely
have chosen a Jabiru 3300 for my 601XL. It's a sweet engine, and the
installation seems relatively straight forward. But then again, if I
were to spend that kind of money, I might have considered building an RV
instead.
As for reliability -- that's a separate issue altogether and builders
need to reconcile that themselves. But this discussion centered purely
on economics, assuming both engine type choices to be equally reliable.
(the Stratus situation is another story....)
Mike Fortunato
do not archive
Sign up for Juno Today at http://www.juno.com!
Look for special offers at Best Buy stores.
Message 19
| 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: Alternator Hum 0.12 HTML_TITLE_EMPTY |
BODY: 1.68 SUBJ_HAS_SPACES Subject contains lots of white space
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
I bought this noise filter today based on the advice below. I have
sufferd headset noise for the last 5 years and just tried to ignore it.
In my case I get ignition noise but it doesn't kick in until the
alternator comes on line (not until 2000RPM). So I am assuming it can't
be being picked up by the antenna because it would happen as soon as I
started the engine.
If it works this will be awesome!
Frank
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of James
Sagerser
Subject: Zenith-List: RE: Alternator Hum 0.12 HTML_TITLE_EMPTY BODY:
1.68 SUBJ_HAS_SPACES Subject contains lots of white space
--> Zenith-List message posted by: James Sagerser <alaskajim@cox.net>
I tried your advice today but with my situation, it was only marginally
successful. I then purchased a "Heavy-Duty Automotive Electrical Noise
Filter" (cat. No. 270-051B) from Radio Shack for $17.00. It had four
leads; orange to the power side of the radio (red wire), black to the
black ground wire of the radio, Red to the A/C power supply (my avionics
switch), and another black wire from the noise filter to ground. This
setup worked extremely well. No adverse noise what-so-ever. My
transmission to the tower went from "unreadable" to "loud and clear".
Thanks again. Jim
Message 20
| 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: "Matt & Jo" <archermj@swbell.net>
Boy did the RV vrs 601 stir things up. I really think they are both great
aircraft, we are lucky to have such great choices. The main thing is I think
in our quest for numbers we sometimes forget the things that originally
inspired us all. I was sent this story a while back and it may better
illustrate the point.
Subject: A Pilot's Lot
One fine hot Summer's afternoon a Cessna 150 was flying in the pattern
at a quiet country airfield. The Instructor was getting quite bothered
with the student's inability to maintain altitude in the thermals and
was getting impatient at sometimes having to take over the controls.
Just then he saw a twin engine Cessna 5,000ft above him and thought
"Another 1,000 hrs of this and I qualify for that twin charter job!
Aaahh.. to be a real pilot.. going somewhere!"
The Cessna 402 was already late and the boss told him this charter was
for one of the Company's premier clients. He'd already set MCT and the
cylinders didn't like it in the heat of this Summer's day. He was at
6,000ft and the winds were now a 20kt headwind. Today was the 6th day
straight and he was pretty damn tired of fighting these engines. Maybe
if he got 10,000ft out of them the wind might die off... geez those
cylinder temps! He looked out momentarily and saw a B737 leaving a
contrail at 33,000ft in the serene blue sky. "Oh man" he thought, "My
interview is next month. I hope I just don't blow it! Outa G/A, nice jet
job, above the weather... no snotty passengers to wait for.. aahhh."
The Boeing 737 bucked and weaved in the heavy CAT at FL330 and ATC
advised that lower levels were not available due traffic. The Captain,
who was only recently advised that his destination was below RVR
minimums had slowed to LRC to try and hold off a possible inflight
diversion, and arrange an ETA that would helpfully ensure the fog had
lifted to CATII minima. The Company negotiations broke down yesterday
and looked as if everyone was going to take a damn pay cut. The F/O's
will be particularly hard hit as their pay wasn't anything to speak of
anyway. Finally deciding on a speed compromise between LRC and
turbulence penetration, the Captain looked up and saw Concorde at Mach
2+. Tapping his F/O's shoulder as the 737 took another bashing, he said
"Now THAT'S what we should be on... huge pay ... super fast... not too
many routes... not too many legs... above the CAT.. yep! What a life...!
FL590 was not what he wanted anyway and considered FL570. Already the
TAT was creeping up again and either they would have to descend or slow
down. That damn rear fuel transfer pump was becoming unreliable and the
F/E had said moments ago that the radiation meter was not reading
numbers that he'd like to see. Concorde descended to FL570 but the
radiation was still quite high even though the Notam indicated hunky
dory below FL610. Fuel flow was up and the transfer pump was
intermittent. Evening turned into night as they passed over the
Atlantic. Looking up, the F/O could see a tiny white dot moving against
the backdrop of a myriad of stars. "Hey Captain" he called as he
pointed. "Must be the Shuttle. "The Captain looked for a moment and
agreed. Quietly he thought how a Shuttle mission, while complicated,
must be the be all and end all in aviation. Above the crap, no radiation
problems, no damn fuel transfer problems... aaah. Must be a great way to
earn a buck."
Discovery was into its 27th orbit and perigee was 200ft out from
nominated rendezvous altitude with the commsat. The robot arm was
virtually U/S and a walk may become necessary. The 200ft predicted error
would necessitate a corrective burn and Discovery needed that fuel if a
walk was to be required. Houston continually asked what the Commander
wanted to do but the advice they proffered wasn't much help. The
Commander had already been 12 hours on station sorting out the problem
and just wanted 10 minutes to himself to take a leak. Just then a
mission specialist, who had tilted the telescope down to the surface for
a minute or two, called the Commander to the scope. "Have a look at this
Skipper, isn't this the kinda flying you said you wanted to do after you
finish up with NASA?" The Commander peered through the telescope and
cried "Ooooohhhhh yeah! Now THAT'S flying! Man, that's what its all
about! Geez I'd give my left nut just to be doing THAT down there!" What
the Discovery Commander was looking at was a Cessna 150 in the pattern
at a quiet country airfield on a nice bright sunny afternoon.
Boy, I'll tell you... pilots are never happy unless they are drinking
beer and looking for a better job!
Message 21
| 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: | Stratus E-81/modified heads |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Charles Heathco" <cheathco@comcast.net>
Hiya, I finally got missing info on this 601HDS project and there is a note
that the heads were reworked by Ram Performance (fixes potential valve guide
problems) and that the bolts have not been torqed, nor valve clearances set.
Only thing I have about the engine is a Maint guide which does give valve
adj spects (I assume same with this head.) Dont have head bolt torqe info.
Anyone have this info? charlie heathco
Message 22
| 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: RE: Alternator Hum 0.12 HTML_TITLE_EMPTY |
BODY: 1.68 SUBJ_HAS_SPACES Subject contains lots of white space
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Charles Heathco" <cheathco@comcast.net>
I picked up the Radio Shack filter this weekend that Jim used, will get it
installed hopefully in next couple days. (not looking forward to getting
this 65 yr old bod under the panel and back out :-) Charlie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: RE: Alternator Hum 0.12 HTML_TITLE_EMPTY BODY:
1.68 SUBJ_HAS_SPACES Subject contains lots of white space
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)"
> <frank.hinde@hp.com>
>
> I bought this noise filter today based on the advice below. I have
> sufferd headset noise for the last 5 years and just tried to ignore it.
>
> In my case I get ignition noise but it doesn't kick in until the
> alternator comes on line (not until 2000RPM). So I am assuming it can't
> be being picked up by the antenna because it would happen as soon as I
> started the engine.
>
> If it works this will be awesome!
>
> Frank
>
> Do not archive
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of James
> Sagerser
> To: zenith-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Zenith-List: RE: Alternator Hum 0.12 HTML_TITLE_EMPTY BODY:
> 1.68 SUBJ_HAS_SPACES Subject contains lots of white space
>
>
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: James Sagerser <alaskajim@cox.net>
>
> I tried your advice today but with my situation, it was only marginally
> successful. I then purchased a "Heavy-Duty Automotive Electrical Noise
> Filter" (cat. No. 270-051B) from Radio Shack for $17.00. It had four
> leads; orange to the power side of the radio (red wire), black to the
> black ground wire of the radio, Red to the A/C power supply (my avionics
>
> switch), and another black wire from the noise filter to ground. This
> setup worked extremely well. No adverse noise what-so-ever. My
> transmission to the tower went from "unreadable" to "loud and clear".
> Thanks again. Jim
>
>
>
Message 23
| 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: more on 801 VGs |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "The Meiste's" <meiste@essex1.com>
> With that said I made VGs from standard L and installed them on the
horizontal stabilizer. I now have more elevator control. I like the VGs
enough that they will remain on the 801. I previously made a much smaller
set and they were did not make enough of an improvement to keep them on.
Would I like more elevator control, yes!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Bill,
Glad to hear the VG's helped your plane also (didn't want to be called a
liar).
Kelly Meiste
601 HD (VG's on wings & Stab)
Do not archive
Message 24
| 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: | 801 VG dimension |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Rmtnview@aol.com
What are the dimensions of the VG's on the horizontal stab on the 801? And
how many are used each side? Thanks, rog
Message 25
| 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: | Stratus E-81/modified heads |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Charlie,
If the heads were reworked by Ram there will be a RAM # stamped on the
heads...Mine said RAM 303...Check to make sure this info is stamped in
the heads.....ALL the valve guides will be bronze colout (you can see
the colour through the springs)...The double springs (inner and outer)
were replaced with a single spring in my case.
Head bolt torque is 47 foot pounds...You will need a soob manual for the
correct tightening order though.
I set my clearances to 12 thou inlet and 14 thou exhaust.
Makesure you re egap the valves after say 5 hours of running and check
them again after another 10hours.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Charles
Heathco
Subject: Zenith-List: Stratus E-81/modified heads
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Charles Heathco"
--> <cheathco@comcast.net>
Hiya, I finally got missing info on this 601HDS project and there is a
note
that the heads were reworked by Ram Performance (fixes potential valve
guide
problems) and that the bolts have not been torqed, nor valve clearances
set.
Only thing I have about the engine is a Maint guide which does give
valve
adj spects (I assume same with this head.) Dont have head bolt torqe
info.
Anyone have this info? charlie heathco
Message 26
| 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: Stratus E-81/modified heads |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Charles Heathco" <cheathco@comcast.net>
Thanks, I hope to run across more on the Ram heads in the stack of papers I
have. I could probably tighten using sequence I learned long ime ago on car
engines, center out 1/3, 1/3, then up to the 47lb. charlie. The Maint manual
gives valve clrance both at .014 cold. Did you use .012/,017 for a special
reason? Charlie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Stratus E-81/modified heads
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)"
> <frank.hinde@hp.com>
>
> Charlie,
>
> If the heads were reworked by Ram there will be a RAM # stamped on the
> heads...Mine said RAM 303...Check to make sure this info is stamped in
> the heads.....ALL the valve guides will be bronze colout (you can see
> the colour through the springs)...The double springs (inner and outer)
> were replaced with a single spring in my case.
>
> Head bolt torque is 47 foot pounds...You will need a soob manual for the
> correct tightening order though.
>
> I set my clearances to 12 thou inlet and 14 thou exhaust.
>
> Makesure you re egap the valves after say 5 hours of running and check
> them again after another 10hours.
>
> Frank
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Charles
> Heathco
> To: zenith-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Zenith-List: Stratus E-81/modified heads
>
>
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Charles Heathco"
> --> <cheathco@comcast.net>
>
> Hiya, I finally got missing info on this 601HDS project and there is a
> note
> that the heads were reworked by Ram Performance (fixes potential valve
> guide
> problems) and that the bolts have not been torqed, nor valve clearances
> set.
> Only thing I have about the engine is a Maint guide which does give
> valve
> adj spects (I assume same with this head.) Dont have head bolt torqe
> info.
> Anyone have this info? charlie heathco
>
>
>
Message 27
| 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: "Charles Heathco" <cheathco@comcast.net>
I have read with intrest the posts on dying subys. Seems cooling is the
culprit. This 601UDS that I have has radiator mounted almost flat under
cokcpit area, and lowercowl has about a 6" hole that would direct air toward
the opening in front of it. (cowel not installed) Looks like it will blow
over it and not thru it. There is a 601UD at Jax county,, where I go for
practice and gas, and it has a P-51 looking scoop under it. I saw it taxi by
one day but havent had a chance to look it over or talk to owner. There is a
note in papers from builder that Radiator needs Modification. Anyone have
Pix or drawing of how they placed and cooled radiator? Charlie
Message 28
| 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: | Stratus E-81/modified heads |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
I think Ron at Ram Performance told me 10/12 thou some time back...I
just went conservative on this and ended up at 12/14.
I can't tell you about the sequenece...I can tell you you will have to
grind the snot out of a socket to check the first bolt under the rocker
arm.
The RAM # should be stamped on one end of each head....Its pretty
obvious.
Frank
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Charles
Heathco
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Stratus E-81/modified heads
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Charles Heathco"
--> <cheathco@comcast.net>
Thanks, I hope to run across more on the Ram heads in the stack of
papers I
have. I could probably tighten using sequence I learned long ime ago on
car
engines, center out 1/3, 1/3, then up to the 47lb. charlie. The Maint
manual
gives valve clrance both at .014 cold. Did you use .012/,017 for a
special
reason? Charlie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Stratus E-81/modified heads
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)"
> <frank.hinde@hp.com>
>
> Charlie,
>
> If the heads were reworked by Ram there will be a RAM # stamped on the
> heads...Mine said RAM 303...Check to make sure this info is stamped in
> the heads.....ALL the valve guides will be bronze colout (you can see
> the colour through the springs)...The double springs (inner and outer)
> were replaced with a single spring in my case.
>
> Head bolt torque is 47 foot pounds...You will need a soob manual for
> the correct tightening order though.
>
> I set my clearances to 12 thou inlet and 14 thou exhaust.
>
> Makesure you re egap the valves after say 5 hours of running and check
> them again after another 10hours.
>
> Frank
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Charles
> Heathco
> To: zenith-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Zenith-List: Stratus E-81/modified heads
>
>
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Charles Heathco"
> --> <cheathco@comcast.net>
>
> Hiya, I finally got missing info on this 601HDS project and there is a
> note that the heads were reworked by Ram Performance (fixes potential
> valve guide
> problems) and that the bolts have not been torqed, nor valve
clearances
> set.
> Only thing I have about the engine is a Maint guide which does give
> valve
> adj spects (I assume same with this head.) Dont have head bolt torqe
> info.
> Anyone have this info? charlie heathco
>
>
>
Message 29
| 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: Stratus E-81/modified heads |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: JERICKSON03E@aol.com
In a message dated 11/22/2004 4:47:51 PM Central Standard Time,
cheathco@comcast.net writes:
Only thing I have about the engine is a Maint guide which does give valve
adj spects (I assume same with this head.) Dont have head bolt torqe info.
Anyone have this info? charlie heathco
The local library might have, or be able to find a shop manual.
Message 30
| 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: Stratus E-81/modified heads |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Charles Heathco" <cheathco@comcast.net>
Grind the snot out of the socket? :-) sounds like you have a working
relationshio with ram, you have a ph# or web adr/e-mail? Tnx, Charlie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Stratus E-81/modified heads
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)"
> <frank.hinde@hp.com>
>
> I think Ron at Ram Performance told me 10/12 thou some time back...I
> just went conservative on this and ended up at 12/14.
>
> I can't tell you about the sequenece...I can tell you you will have to
> grind the snot out of a socket to check the first bolt under the rocker
> arm.
>
> The RAM # should be stamped on one end of each head....Its pretty
> obvious.
>
> Frank
>
> Do not archive
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Charles
> Heathco
> To: zenith-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Stratus E-81/modified heads
>
>
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Charles Heathco"
> --> <cheathco@comcast.net>
>
> Thanks, I hope to run across more on the Ram heads in the stack of
> papers I
> have. I could probably tighten using sequence I learned long ime ago on
> car
> engines, center out 1/3, 1/3, then up to the 47lb. charlie. The Maint
> manual
> gives valve clrance both at .014 cold. Did you use .012/,017 for a
> special
> reason? Charlie
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
> To: <zenith-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Stratus E-81/modified heads
>
>
>> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)"
>> <frank.hinde@hp.com>
>>
>> Charlie,
>>
>> If the heads were reworked by Ram there will be a RAM # stamped on the
>
>> heads...Mine said RAM 303...Check to make sure this info is stamped in
>
>> the heads.....ALL the valve guides will be bronze colout (you can see
>> the colour through the springs)...The double springs (inner and outer)
>
>> were replaced with a single spring in my case.
>>
>> Head bolt torque is 47 foot pounds...You will need a soob manual for
>> the correct tightening order though.
>>
>> I set my clearances to 12 thou inlet and 14 thou exhaust.
>>
>> Makesure you re egap the valves after say 5 hours of running and check
>
>> them again after another 10hours.
>>
>> Frank
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Charles
>> Heathco
>> To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Zenith-List: Stratus E-81/modified heads
>>
>>
>> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Charles Heathco"
>> --> <cheathco@comcast.net>
>>
>> Hiya, I finally got missing info on this 601HDS project and there is a
>
>> note that the heads were reworked by Ram Performance (fixes potential
>> valve guide
>> problems) and that the bolts have not been torqed, nor valve
> clearances
>> set.
>> Only thing I have about the engine is a Maint guide which does give
>> valve
>> adj spects (I assume same with this head.) Dont have head bolt torqe
>> info.
>> Anyone have this info? charlie heathco
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Message 31
| 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 |
|
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;
b=Pp7YebcEN1DSrqzVQ68/ia+fRALtmtUHaP2bWaSAsUMeJaiSzmnF9NOc9sNuhsCZPyOffmI6r5Cpej3HVhiV4RCfRUK9an4nltqfq350H1NbE0f3G8CAdgZ+9dpg6lp0i7+v+eiyJKXNLoH1/vDxcWWDOb4kspbF3K1YY1tZNMM=
;
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Gary Gower <ggower_99@yahoo.com>
Hello Paul,
I will give you my personal point of view:
We are building our second 701 and at the same time our first 601 XL,
from our experience I can tell you that, to make a fairly good assemble
job, you need at least 1,000 hrs (not counting the time used to "study"
the plans, "think" of improvements :-) and installing full
instruments).
From that point up, the more hours you spend in the assemble of your
701, it will be better in quality of the details and "Workmanship"...
it pays for this extra effort.
Just beware of adding weight or "complicated gadgets" like swithches,
lights, handles here and there, IFR instruments, you name it...
The Zenith airplanes are very straight forward to built (on the simple
side, compared to other kits), once you (mostly Americans) get used to
metrics and the design "philosophy" of Mr Chris Heintz, will be
dificult to stop building, sometimes until late at night because you
forget to look what time is it, is that much fun and learning...
You can also keep your self active in the list, to make a good team
here, to help us each other with tips to finish and enjoy flying our
airplanes, one last thing: Once you finished your plane, you will
want to stay in the list and share your flying experience with all of
us. We are still so happy flying the plane, that cant stop smiling...
Saludos
Gary Gower
Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico
701 912S with 20 hours and adding fun to it!
--- Lowell Metz <lowellmetz@earthlink.net> wrote:
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Lowell Metz"
> <lowellmetz@earthlink.net>
>
> Paul,
> It took me 1,200 hours to complete my 701 to DAR inspection. You
> could
> probably build the plane in 500 hours as advertised but it wouldn't
> have
> paint , engine , or instruments in it. But you could sit in it and
> make
> engine noises and stir the stick.
> Down side.... humm.... It will cost you more than you plan.... you
> will
> get frustrated from time to time ...... someone is always telling
> you what
> you did wrong...( they are the ones that have never built a plane
> )...
> I keep my plane tied out within a mile of the gulf in southern
> Florida.
> I don't have the cold to deal with but have the salt air which is
> worse. I
> had a cover made , watch for signs of corrosion , and wash it
> frequently.
> So far so good.
>
> Lowell Metz
> DO NOT ARCHIVE
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <PJK98@aol.com>
> To: <zenith-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Zenith-List: 701
>
>
> > --> Zenith-List message posted by: PJK98@aol.com
> >
> > Hello all,may I ask what is the Real build time of a 701 built
> form a
> > kit,and if there any down sides to this plane,thinking about
> starting one
>
>
>
> _->
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________
http://my.yahoo.com
Message 32
| 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: Suburu cooling |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Larry McFarland" <larrymc@qconline.com>
Charlie,
I mounted a Rabbit radiator under the belly and placed an intake on the
front of it that
smooths the air, reduces the air coming into it and slows the air a bit on
expansion. Louvers were
added to the bottom of the radiator that provide negative draft and pull air
through it.
The coolant has not seen anything over 197 degrees and with the fall air, it
stays nearer 180 deg F.
The angles the radiator is supported on are long enough to place it up front
near the gear, or as far as
38" aft of the gear and temps don't seem to be affected by any position.
The scoop might remind you
of the P51 as it has the same sort of look.
You can see the setup on my site at the completions page and construction
details half way down the
subaru engine page if you're interested.
Larry McFarland - 601HDS @ www.macsmachine.com
Subject: Zenith-List: Suburu cooling
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Charles Heathco"
> <cheathco@comcast.net>
>
> I have read with intrest the posts on dying subys. Seems cooling is the
> culprit. Anyone have pix or drawing of how they placed and cooled
> radiator? Charlie
>
Message 33
| 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: Suburu cooling |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
Check out my site, page http://www.angelfire.com/un/ch701/scoop.html. It's
on my 701, but should work just the same on a 601. That's my test pilot,
so he thinks. Larry N1345L
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles Heathco" <cheathco@comcast.net>To:
<zenith-list@matronics.com>
Subject: Zenith-List: Suburu cooling
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Charles Heathco"
<cheathco@comcast.net>
>
> I have read with intrest the posts on dying subys. Seems cooling is the
> culprit. This 601UDS that I have has radiator mounted almost flat under
> cokcpit area, and lowercowl has about a 6" hole that would direct air
toward
> the opening in front of it. (cowel not installed) Looks like it will blow
> over it and not thru it. There is a 601UD at Jax county,, where I go for
> practice and gas, and it has a P-51 looking scoop under it. I saw it taxi
by
> one day but havent had a chance to look it over or talk to owner. There is
a
> note in papers from builder that Radiator needs Modification. Anyone have
> Pix or drawing of how they placed and cooled radiator? Charlie
>
>
Message 34
| 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: Stratus E-81/modified heads |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Jim and Lucy <jpollard@ciaccess.com>
At 05:45 PM 11/22/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Charles Heathco" <cheathco@comcast.net>
>
> Dont have head bolt torqe info.
>Anyone have this info? charlie heathco
I have the factory parts and service manual for this engine.
It has been scanned and is about 4 meg in size each.
If your email can handle it Ill send it to you if
you want it.
Now if your email has problems with large files I may be
able to post it temporarily to the airsoob files section
where you will need to sign up with this yahoo group to
download it. Airsoob is a discussion group for subaru
aircraft conversions.
Jim Pollard
Merlin Ont
ch601hds
ea81
Message 35
| 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 |
|
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;
b=lM7hqOXaAxmDVNfmrnKjH+3TBUBY0mlAYkEqS9fXd9p6HsOJ5sLTDNPX9U82YDVu58rV6viGp7XLpRvFZcki4lBbblb2bLDqjqGk4qDj9/oLbazR0/etA9OfAnKKSgZc19qppFMaxMS7O1nwJ4lrGVvG4+F5Kdx3cMlZthGti9g=
;
| Subject: | Re: Suburu cooling |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Michel Therrien <mtherr@yahoo.com>
While I had difficulties with almost everything of my
engine installation (leaking manifold, bad design for
engine mount, burned valves, cracked exhaust, too lean
carburetor then, ice-making carburetor,falling piece
off my reduction drive unit, etc etc), cooling is one
area where I got immediate success.
I have a VW Rabbit radiator mounted between the
firewall and the engine (inside the custom made
cowling). Initially, I had a B&M oil cooler mounted
on the radiator. While water temp was good (185 to
195F), oil was too cool (160F). So, I removed the oil
cooler.
Oil temp in summer stays between 195 and 220 (I use
Castrol Syntech oil). As cold weather arrived, oil
became cool (< 190F), so I blocked part of the lower
opening on my cowling for the winter. Water temp
stays at thermostat temp. (185F).
Details are shown on my web site for the radiator
installation and the cowling:
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601/chengine5.htm
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601/chcowling.htm
Michel
PS: I'm happy to say I passed my in-flight
examination today! I still have the theory exam to do
before qualifying for the PPL.
--- Charles Heathco <cheathco@comcast.net> wrote:
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Charles Heathco"
> <cheathco@comcast.net>
>
> I have read with intrest the posts on dying subys.
> Seems cooling is the
> culprit. This 601UDS that I have has radiator
> mounted almost flat under
> cokcpit area, and lowercowl has about a 6" hole that
> would direct air toward
> the opening in front of it. (cowel not installed)
> Looks like it will blow
> over it and not thru it. There is a 601UD at Jax
> county,, where I go for
> practice and gas, and it has a P-51 looking scoop
> under it. I saw it taxi by
> one day but havent had a chance to look it over or
> talk to owner. There is a
> note in papers from builder that Radiator needs
> Modification. Anyone have
> Pix or drawing of how they placed and cooled
> radiator? Charlie
>
=====
----------------------------
Michel Therrien CH601-HD, C-GZGQ
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601
http://www.zenithair.com/bldrlist/profiles/mthobby
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
__________________________________
http://my.yahoo.com
Message 36
| 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: Stratus E-81/modified heads |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Jim and Lucy <jpollard@ciaccess.com>
At 05:45 PM 11/22/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Charles Heathco" <cheathco@comcast.net>
>
> Dont have head bolt torqe info.
>Anyone have this info? charlie heathco
I have the factory parts and service manual for this engine.
It has been scanned and is about 4 meg in size each.
If your email can handle it Ill send it to you if
you want it.
Now if your email has problems with large files I may be
able to post it temporarily to the airsoob files section
where you will need to sign up with this yahoo group to
download it. Airsoob is a discussion group for subaru
aircraft conversions.
Jim Pollard
Merlin Ont
ch601hds
ea81
Message 37
| 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 |
|
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;
b=tKhfJ8srr35ddKvifLGX54K284SDDEwEciD78z+wPaL72QMcE8LBsYCXi+WzhUsu3ViYhcnL2Nz8+OduPsLETRkc5ErvoQpxARA0b5qAwEtiSYLS7UmSyWg6i8jqELIdggC1UIvU00V2NzkVC2l3YIEhIUXblpmUCH1TupZvQUA=
;
| Subject: | The Zodiac XL vs. RV |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Gary Gower <ggower_99@yahoo.com>
Just one comment Frank,
I am sure that the XL and the HDS are also very diferent airplanes, I
dont think you can compare them in performance...
Diferent wings, diferent airfoil, diferent power, diferent weight
etc... This could make an apples and oranges comparision. Maybe like
comparing a 582 powered older 701 (with straight axle) and the 701 SP
with 912 engine, they are the same airplane but perform very
diferent...
Saludos
Gary Gower.
--- "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com> wrote:
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)"
> <frank.hinde@hp.com>
>
> Aren't personal preference arguments so much fun?...:)
>
> So I built An HDS and an about to start on an RV-7A...As you can
> imagine
> my selection process was a little different second time round (a bit
> like a second marriage in fact...:)..).
>
> The 601 is a very capable little plane, I have enjoyed it immensley
> but
> I thought you might be interested in a couple of other insights.
>
> 1) The 601 has a pretty stout main landing gear. There is one strip
> where we went for our backpacking honeymoon and it was so rough I
> really
> don't think taking an RV in there is an option.
>
> 2) 601HDS has very good short field performance...(HD should be
> better)
>
> 3) low altitude climb is very good...Not so good as weight goes up
> but
> that is probably true of the RV too?
>
> 4) With a heavy engine the amount of stuff you can get into an HD(s)
> is
> probably a little more than you can get into an RV and the weight
> behind
> the seats is limited to 100lbs...More than the 601 yes, but remember
> there are no wing lockers on an RV.
>
> 5) Quality of the kit...No comparison here...Its almost impossible to
> buid a bad RV
>
> 6) Cross country cruise....This was the biggest dissappointment right
> from the first flight. Even after 348 hours I'm still frustrated.
>
> 7) Altitude performance. Nobody mentions this but in an area of the
> country that has large pointy things its pretty important. The 601
> HDS
> climbs very slowly at altitude and at gross weight is really limited
> to
> 9000 feet density altitude. Now before everyone gets upset I'n not
> saying it won't fly higher...It will but it takes longer to get there
> and many is the time I have pushed towards a ridge line with clenched
> teeth hoping for a bit more height...I have RV friends who have not
> only
> scorched past me in level flight they get higher faster and in the
> real
> world this is a big deal.
>
> 8) comparing a tandem aircraft with a side by side on W&B is really
> an
> unfair comparison. The side by side will always win....Just get a
> ride
> in a 7! I think the cockpit is an inch narrower?....Not an issue for
> me
> at 150lbs but I could see that extra 1/2" might be an issue
> challenged
> in this area.
>
> 9) If you weigh 205 and you live near mountains then see section 7
> above...:)
>
> 10) Considering IFR in a 601....your a braver man than I.
>
> The botton line is they really are different airplanes. The 601 is
> low
> budget low performance machine that is quicker to build. I have no
> delusions that my Dodge Neon compared to my neighbors 500SL Mercedes
> however....I'll just blast past him in the RV....:)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of The
> Keeners
> To: zenith-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Zenith-List: The Zodiac XL vs. RV
>
>
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "The Keeners"
> --> <kim.forest@surewest.net>
>
> I'm quoting someone else here:
> Even if you finish your Zodiac 200 hours before the RV builder (and
> that's a conservative estimate) and your Zodiac flies at 120knots
> (should be no problem with a Jabiru) you could fly around the world
> before that RV builder even starts his engine!!!! They'll have 24,000
> miles of catching up to do.
>
> I work with a guy who flies an RV4. I weigh 205 and he can't even
> take
> me flying because of weight and balance. If my XL was flying, I
> could
> take us both on a long cross country. The RV6/7/8 have rectified
> this,
> but even the RV7's cockpit is narrower than the XL!
>
> One proud (and obviously biased) XL fan.
> Forest K.
> Table complete - starter kit started
> N601FK Reserved
>
>
>
> _->
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 38
| 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: Stratus E-81/modified heads |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Ramperf@aol.com
Charlie
I have the tightening sequence if that's what you need . I will send a
pic of it to your email
Ron
Message 39
| 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: "Dave Alberti" <daberti@execpc.com>
What is a 601 UDS?
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Charles
Heathco
Subject: Zenith-List: Suburu cooling
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Charles Heathco" <cheathco@comcast.net>
I have read with intrest the posts on dying subys. Seems cooling is the
culprit. This 601UDS that I have has radiator mounted almost flat under
cokcpit area, and lowercowl has about a 6" hole that would direct air toward
the opening in front of it. (cowel not installed) Looks like it will blow
over it and not thru it. There is a 601UD at Jax county,, where I go for
practice and gas, and it has a P-51 looking scoop under it. I saw it taxi by
one day but havent had a chance to look it over or talk to owner. There is a
note in papers from builder that Radiator needs Modification. Anyone have
Pix or drawing of how they placed and cooled radiator? Charlie
Message 40
| 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: Suburu cooling |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Charles Heathco" <cheathco@comcast.net>
Ok, thats gives me some Idea, I guess the louvers help suck the air thru it.
Is the scoop a readymade item, or has to be built up? By the way where are
you located? charlie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry McFarland" <larrymc@qconline.com>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Suburu cooling
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Larry McFarland"
> <larrymc@qconline.com>
>
> Charlie,
> I mounted a Rabbit radiator under the belly and placed an intake on the
> front of it that
> smooths the air, reduces the air coming into it and slows the air a bit on
> expansion. Louvers were
> added to the bottom of the radiator that provide negative draft and pull
> air
> through it.
> The coolant has not seen anything over 197 degrees and with the fall air,
> it
> stays nearer 180 deg F.
> The angles the radiator is supported on are long enough to place it up
> front
> near the gear, or as far as
> 38" aft of the gear and temps don't seem to be affected by any position.
> The scoop might remind you
> of the P51 as it has the same sort of look.
> You can see the setup on my site at the completions page and construction
> details half way down the
> subaru engine page if you're interested.
>
> Larry McFarland - 601HDS @ www.macsmachine.com
>
> Subject: Zenith-List: Suburu cooling
>
>
>> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Charles Heathco"
>> <cheathco@comcast.net>
>>
>> I have read with intrest the posts on dying subys. Seems cooling is the
>> culprit. Anyone have pix or drawing of how they placed and cooled
>> radiator? Charlie
>>
>
>
>
Message 41
| 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: Suburu cooling |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Charles Heathco" <cheathco@comcast.net>
Ok, Tnx, another aproach, did you make the box from scratch? charlie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Suburu cooling
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Larry Martin" <lrm@isp.com>
>
> Check out my site, page http://www.angelfire.com/un/ch701/scoop.html.
> It's
> on my 701, but should work just the same on a 601. That's my test pilot,
> so he thinks. Larry N1345L
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Charles Heathco" <cheathco@comcast.net>To:
> <zenith-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Zenith-List: Suburu cooling
>
>
>> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Charles Heathco"
> <cheathco@comcast.net>
>>
>> I have read with intrest the posts on dying subys. Seems cooling is the
>> culprit. This 601UDS that I have has radiator mounted almost flat under
>> cokcpit area, and lowercowl has about a 6" hole that would direct air
> toward
>> the opening in front of it. (cowel not installed) Looks like it will blow
>> over it and not thru it. There is a 601UD at Jax county,, where I go for
>> practice and gas, and it has a P-51 looking scoop under it. I saw it taxi
> by
>> one day but havent had a chance to look it over or talk to owner. There
>> is
> a
>> note in papers from builder that Radiator needs Modification. Anyone have
>> Pix or drawing of how they placed and cooled radiator? Charlie
>>
>>
>
>
>
Message 42
| 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: Suburu cooling |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Charles Heathco" <cheathco@comcast.net>
Interestng setup, I dont have any room for something like that tho, charlie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michel Therrien" <mtherr@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Suburu cooling
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: Michel Therrien <mtherr@yahoo.com>
>
> While I had difficulties with almost everything of my
> engine installation (leaking manifold, bad design for
> engine mount, burned valves, cracked exhaust, too lean
> carburetor then, ice-making carburetor,falling piece
> off my reduction drive unit, etc etc), cooling is one
> area where I got immediate success.
>
> I have a VW Rabbit radiator mounted between the
> firewall and the engine (inside the custom made
> cowling). Initially, I had a B&M oil cooler mounted
> on the radiator. While water temp was good (185 to
> 195F), oil was too cool (160F). So, I removed the oil
> cooler.
>
> Oil temp in summer stays between 195 and 220 (I use
> Castrol Syntech oil). As cold weather arrived, oil
> became cool (< 190F), so I blocked part of the lower
> opening on my cowling for the winter. Water temp
> stays at thermostat temp. (185F).
>
> Details are shown on my web site for the radiator
> installation and the cowling:
>
> http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601/chengine5.htm
> http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601/chcowling.htm
>
>
> Michel
> PS: I'm happy to say I passed my in-flight
> examination today! I still have the theory exam to do
> before qualifying for the PPL.
>
>
> --- Charles Heathco <cheathco@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Charles Heathco"
>> <cheathco@comcast.net>
>>
>> I have read with intrest the posts on dying subys.
>> Seems cooling is the
>> culprit. This 601UDS that I have has radiator
>> mounted almost flat under
>> cokcpit area, and lowercowl has about a 6" hole that
>> would direct air toward
>> the opening in front of it. (cowel not installed)
>> Looks like it will blow
>> over it and not thru it. There is a 601UD at Jax
>> county,, where I go for
>> practice and gas, and it has a P-51 looking scoop
>> under it. I saw it taxi by
>> one day but havent had a chance to look it over or
>> talk to owner. There is a
>> note in papers from builder that Radiator needs
>> Modification. Anyone have
>> Pix or drawing of how they placed and cooled
>> radiator? Charlie
>>
>
> =====
> ----------------------------
> Michel Therrien CH601-HD, C-GZGQ
> http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601
> http://www.zenithair.com/bldrlist/profiles/mthobby
> http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> http://my.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 43
| 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: Stratus E-81/modified heads |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Charles Heathco" <cheathco@comcast.net>
Hiya, dont think I can handle that file in email but could you email the
heald bolt torque part? also how do I get to the airsoob site? charlie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim and Lucy" <jpollard@ciaccess.com>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Stratus E-81/modified heads
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: Jim and Lucy <jpollard@ciaccess.com>
>
> At 05:45 PM 11/22/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>>--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Charles Heathco"
>><cheathco@comcast.net>
>>
>> Dont have head bolt torqe info.
>>Anyone have this info? charlie heathco
>
>
> I have the factory parts and service manual for this engine.
> It has been scanned and is about 4 meg in size each.
> If your email can handle it Ill send it to you if
> you want it.
> Now if your email has problems with large files I may be
> able to post it temporarily to the airsoob files section
> where you will need to sign up with this yahoo group to
> download it. Airsoob is a discussion group for subaru
> aircraft conversions.
>
>
> Jim Pollard
> Merlin Ont
> ch601hds
> ea81
>
>
>
Message 44
| 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: Stratus E-81/modified heads |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Charles Heathco" <cheathco@comcast.net>
Ok tnx Charlie
----- Original Message -----
From: <Ramperf@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Stratus E-81/modified heads
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: Ramperf@aol.com
>
> Charlie
>
> I have the tightening sequence if that's what you need . I will send a
> pic of it to your email
> Ron
>
>
>
Message 45
| 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: CH701 Question - Howard Carter |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: ray.stlaurent@vsea.com
Howard,
You asked me a question on this list. My answer is yes.
I tried to respond to you directly but the address was bounced. You can
contact me off-line if you want to discuss details.
-- Ray
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Message 46
| 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: Suburu cooling |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "gary" <FlyinK@Efortress.com>
> Anyone have Pix or drawing of how they placed and cooled radiator?
here's a very rough website but you'll get the idea. i have tons of
pictures and more details if you want. it took a few revisions but i
finally got the cooling nailed. i think RAM's radiator would be nice -
close to what I ended up with. a bit of overkill for 100HP but with a soob
you can always get more HP if you want it ;<}
(sorry for being a non-ZAC lurker but there's lot's of good soob info here)
Gary Krysztopik
Pelican PL - N522GK
Stratus Subaru EA-81
Newport, RI
http://members.efortress.com/flyink/index.html
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! --
|