---------------------------------------------------------- Zenith-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Thu 08/02/07: 34 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 12:11 AM - Re: closing wing (Peter Barthold) 2. 12:47 AM - shock absorbers for HDS (Peter Barthold) 3. 05:42 AM - Re: South African Builders (Jonathan Starke) 4. 05:54 AM - Re: Reaming aileron bellcrank for bushings? (dfmoeller) 5. 06:36 AM - Re: Re: Reaming aileron bellcrank for bushings? (Larry Winger) 6. 06:36 AM - 701 builders, bottom fuselage (Keith Ashcraft) 7. 07:19 AM - Re: Re: closing wing (LarryMcFarland) 8. 07:30 AM - Re: shock absorbers for HDS (Jeff Davidson) 9. 07:46 AM - Re: Control cables for 601XL () 10. 08:08 AM - Thrust angle in an XL with a Jabiru 3300 (Joe) 11. 08:08 AM - Thrust angle in an XL with a Jabiru 3300 (Joe) 12. 08:22 AM - Re: Control cables for 601XL (Dave Johnson) 13. 08:24 AM - Is Dave Austin still on this list? (Paul Hartl) 14. 09:39 AM - Re: Control cables for 601XL () 15. 09:55 AM - XL Progress (PatrickW) 16. 10:15 AM - Corvair engines (Greg Kendall) 17. 10:43 AM - Re: Neighbor's tried to (ashontz) 18. 11:05 AM - Re: Corvair engines (Papa Foxtrot) 19. 11:33 AM - Re: Re: Neighbor's tried to () 20. 11:40 AM - Re: Corvair engines (Crvsecretary@aol.com) 21. 11:40 AM - Re: Corvair engines (Craig Payne) 22. 12:00 PM - Re: Control cables for 601XL (Bryan Martin) 23. 12:04 PM - Re: Corvair engines (Papa Foxtrot) 24. 12:31 PM - Re: Control cables for 601XL () 25. 12:47 PM - Re: 10% from Wicks (C Smith) 26. 02:46 PM - Re: 10% from Wicks (Aaron Gustafson) 27. 03:51 PM - Re: Corvair engines (Bill Naumuk) 28. 03:52 PM - Re: 10% from Wicks (C Smith) 29. 03:59 PM - Re: Control cables for 601XL (Juan Vega) 30. 04:12 PM - Re: 10% from Wicks (R.P.) 31. 04:45 PM - Re: Corvair engines (Afterfxllc@aol.com) 32. 04:48 PM - Re: Thrust angle in an XL with a Jabiru 3300 (fred sanford) 33. 05:09 PM - Re: Re: Thrust angle in an XL with a Jabiru 3300 (Jerry Hey) 34. 06:40 PM - Neighbor's tried to (kensmith@springnet1.com) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 12:11:44 AM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: Re: closing wing From: "Peter Barthold" Hi Carlos, I just closed the bottom of my left HDS wing. The reason to do this against the advice of the manual was the need to stow away both wings. I found it easier to place them securely on their finished bottoms. I can't close them fully since they have to wait for inspection. Second: I need to get the wings off the table before I can start on the ailerons. To align them properly might be easier with the top skin still accessable. btw: I also have to do the wing locker doors. Yours look really great, I played around with the idea of having these nice fasteners...as always you're way ahead of me... [Laughing] Greetings from Germany Peter Barthold HDS TDO Tail done wings in progress Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=127104#127104 ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 12:47:23 AM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: shock absorbers for HDS From: "Peter Barthold" Hello Gang, I am evaluating different scenarios for my HDS taildragger gear. I don't like the idea of bulky gear parts sticking out of my leading edge. When strolling through the archives I also found out, that installing the bungee gear is not considered a piece of cake for most builders. the alternative would be a Grove gear. But these also have the reputation of being hard to adapt to a 601. plus they are quite heavy. OTOH, I wouldn't want to deviate too much from the proven original design. My thoughts are of vehicle (motorcycle?) shock absorbers to replace the ole bungee assembly. Has any of the gentlemen here heard or seen of anything similar already done? any thoughts appreciated Greetings from Germany Peter HDS TDO tail done, Wings in progress www.petersprojekt42.de Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=127106#127106 ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 05:42:10 AM PST US From: "Jonathan Starke" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: South African Builders Hi I am in Cape Town. Jonathan Starke 601XL 79hrs and counting. >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com >[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Capetonian >Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 7:58 AM >To: zenith-list@matronics.com >Subject: RE: Zenith-List: South African Builders > > >Howzit, > >You might want to join the avcom.co.za forum, there are a few Zenith >builders prowling around there. > >There was also a chap who posted some stunning pics of his >white ZS- Zenith >flying along the coast but I cannot remember who it was, you >might want to >search the Matronics Forum. > >I'm a future builder, 100% South African but living in Europe >so I am not >much help! > >Mark > >Do not archive. > > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com >[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of >martyn@flight.co.za >Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 6:55 AM >To: zenith-list@matronics.com >Subject: Zenith-List: South African Builders > > >Hello All. > >Anybody recall nmaes amnd contact details of South African >Zenith builders >at all? > >Thanks in advance > >Do not archive > > ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 05:54:39 AM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Reaming aileron bellcrank for bushings? From: "dfmoeller" My 601 was made from a factory kit by the builder (not me), original issue 2001 vintage. I managed to do some wing damage, so some repairs are being made. I ordered the most recent 3/06 drawings in the process. Here is what I've found. 0. In looking at the 1st and last set of drawings, there is no difference in dimensions on the two sets. 1. My bushings slide easily into the spacer blocks. There is no discernable slop and certainly not an interference fit. There is a little grease between the bushing and spacers. 2. The vertical stack up of the spacers and bellcrank are less than the bushing - meaning the angle brackets can only clamp the bushing when torqued (since the vertical displacement between brackets is exactly the same measurement as the bushing, any pressure at all will ensure clamping). 3. The angle brackets are installed on the rib (per the assembly instructions) by torquing the bushing between the brackets and then riveting in place - guaranteeing an immobile bushing. 4. The following statement was added to the drawing 6W10 sometime between my two issues: "6W10-3 bearing surface is between bushing & spacer". Intuitively, I too would have thought the bearing surface would have been designed to be between the steel bolt shank and bushing (easily replaceable), but not so. Doug leinad wrote: > Doug, > Perhaps you have a different version of the drawings. My drawings date 12/03 don't stack up that way at all. > The 3 aluminum parts 1/4 + 1/8 + 1/4 = .625 > Then the drawing calls for .012 inches of the bushing sticking out past the aluminum.. This gives .649.. inches. THis is equal to 16.48 mm. The drawing also says the bushing is 16.5 mm long. > This is all on drawing 6w10. > Then on drawing 6w6 it shows the brackets also 16.5 mm appart. > So the drawings call for line on line to 2 thou under depending on which drawing to believe. In the machine shop that's called a slip fit. > I think the better assembly would be a press fit for the bushing and a slip fit for the "sandwhich" between the brackets. (just as the drawings show) The aluminum makes a terrible bearing. Steel bolt sliding against the bushing should last much longer. Check any machinist handbook on this. > Dan > > > > I just assembled this area in a wing I've had to rebuild. > > > > The way that bushing works is that the bolt clamps the bushing solid with the L brackets. This is obvious from the fact that the bushing is a slight bit longer than the stackup being clamped. The bearing surface is between the blocks on the bellcrank and the bushing. An interference fit is too tight. What you want is the bushing to just slide into the blocks with as little slop as possible. I would ream. > > > > The downside to making it too big, even a couple thousandths, will be sloppy aileron control, maybe not the end of the world! > > > > Doug > Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=127130#127130 ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 06:36:19 AM PST US From: "Larry Winger" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Reaming aileron bellcrank for bushings? FWIW, I came to the same conclusion after multiple re-readings of the 6W10 plans (3/2006 revision), and a call to Zenith. They apparently want to protect the bolt from any wear, whatsoever. That is only accomplished if the bushing can spin freely in the bellcrank block and is then immobilized through the clamping action provided between the aileron bellcrank supports (6W6-11). Larry Winger Tustin, CA 601XL/Corvair On 8/2/07, dfmoeller wrote: > > > My 601 was made from a factory kit by the builder (not me), original issue > 2001 vintage. I managed to do some wing damage, so some repairs are being > made. I ordered the most recent 3/06 drawings in the process. Here is what > I've found. > > 0. In looking at the 1st and last set of drawings, there is no difference > in dimensions on the two sets. > 1. My bushings slide easily into the spacer blocks. There is no > discernable slop and certainly not an interference fit. There is a little > grease between the bushing and spacers. > 2. The vertical stack up of the spacers and bellcrank are less than the > bushing - meaning the angle brackets can only clamp the bushing when torqued > (since the vertical displacement between brackets is exactly the same > measurement as the bushing, any pressure at all will ensure clamping). > 3. The angle brackets are installed on the rib (per the assembly > instructions) by torquing the bushing between the brackets and then riveting > in place - guaranteeing an immobile bushing. > 4. The following statement was added to the drawing 6W10 sometime between > my two issues: "6W10-3 bearing surface is between bushing & spacer". > > Intuitively, I too would have thought the bearing surface would have been > designed to be between the steel bolt shank and bushing (easily > replaceable), but not so. > > Doug > > > leinad wrote: > > Doug, > > Perhaps you have a different version of the drawings. My drawings date > 12/03 don't stack up that way at all. > > The 3 aluminum parts 1/4 + 1/8 + 1/4 = .625 > > Then the drawing calls for .012 inches of the bushing sticking out past > the aluminum.. This gives .649.. inches. THis is equal to 16.48 mm. The > drawing also says the bushing is 16.5 mm long. > > This is all on drawing 6w10. > > Then on drawing 6w6 it shows the brackets also 16.5 mm appart. > > So the drawings call for line on line to 2 thou under depending on which > drawing to believe. In the machine shop that's called a slip fit. > > I think the better assembly would be a press fit for the bushing and a > slip fit for the "sandwhich" between the brackets. (just as the drawings > show) The aluminum makes a terrible bearing. Steel bolt sliding against > the bushing should last much longer. Check any machinist handbook on this. > > Dan > > > > > > > I just assembled this area in a wing I've had to rebuild. > > > > > > The way that bushing works is that the bolt clamps the bushing solid > with the L brackets. This is obvious from the fact that the bushing is a > slight bit longer than the stackup being clamped. The bearing surface is > between the blocks on the bellcrank and the bushing. An interference fit is > too tight. What you want is the bushing to just slide into the blocks with > as little slop as possible. I would ream. > > > > > > The downside to making it too big, even a couple thousandths, will be > sloppy aileron control, maybe not the end of the world! > > > > > > Doug > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=127130#127130 > > ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 06:36:19 AM PST US From: Keith Ashcraft Subject: Zenith-List: 701 builders, bottom fuselage All, I am trying to do some pre-drilling holes in the bottom fuselage (7F2-3). To start off with, my plans 4th, 6th printing, show that there is 303mm between cl to cl of 7F1-3 and 7F1-4, but the assembly/construction manual 1.2 04/2003, ( Fuselage Section 1 - page 3 of 10) states that there should be 285mm between the two. What are some of you scratch builders using, or what is the factory pre-drilled holes measuring? Thanks, Keith N 38.9947 W 105.1305 Alt. 9,100' CH701 -- scratch ***************************************************************** This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may be proprietary and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the sender. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of ITT Corporation. The recipient should check this e-mail and any attachments for the presence of viruses. ITT accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this e-mail. ******************************************************************* ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 07:19:02 AM PST US From: LarryMcFarland Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: closing wing Hi Peter, I'd recommend you place the wing forward of the area you assemble the aileron so that you can trim to fit progressively. The ends of the wing and clearance for movement are otherwise difficult to match up. Drawings alone sometimes don't quite do it. http://www.macsmachine.com/images/wing/ailerons/full/hingealign.gif http://www.macsmachine.com/images/wing/ailerons/full/leftendrearview.gif http://www.macsmachine.com/images/wing/ailerons/full/leftinsideend.gif http://www.macsmachine.com/images/wing/ailerons/full/inbrdtrimedge.gif Good luck, Larry McFarland 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com Peter Barthold wrote: > > Hi Carlos, > > I just closed the bottom of my left HDS wing. The reason to do this against the advice of the manual was the need to stow away both wings. I found it easier to place them securely on their finished bottoms. I can't close them fully since they have to wait for inspection. > Second: I need to get the wings off the table before I can start on the ailerons. To align them properly might be easier with the top skin still accessable. > btw: I also have to do the wing locker doors. Yours look really great, I played around with the idea of having these nice fasteners...as always you're way ahead of me... [Laughing] > > Greetings from Germany > Peter Barthold > HDS TDO > Tail done wings in progress > > > ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 07:30:38 AM PST US From: Jeff Davidson Subject: Re: Zenith-List: shock absorbers for HDS >When strolling through the archives I also found out, that installing the bungee gear is not considered a piece of cake for most builders. >the alternative would be a Grove gear. But these also have the reputation of being hard to adapt to a 601. plus they are quite heavy. Peter, After readings posts on the bungee gear installation for years and searching the archives, I was apprehensive about them too. When it came time to install them, I made the tool described in the archives - and probably on the 601.org web site too. Forewarned and with the techniques advertised by those who have gone before, the actual installation simply wasn't a problem. I used some dental squeezers to put the bolts into well reamed holes without much fuss. It really isn't that bad and help is available. Jeff Davidson do not archive ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 07:46:47 AM PST US From: Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Control cables for 601XL Sort of a side issue----- While I wouldn't advocate using string or safety wire for control cables, it does seem a bit of overkill to use a cable stronger than the max gross weight of the aircraft. It's not possible, even under high adrenalin situations, to exert anywhere near breaking strength of the cable, particularly sitting in the cockpit. If anything, you'd rip the control surface apart first, assuming you could maintain that much air load on the part. Same goes for turnbuckles. Do we really need 900 pound breaking-strength turnbuckles on an elevator we could put, at most, 200 pounds of backstick pull? Paul Rodriguez 601XL/Corvair Canopy getting close to done ----- Original Message ----- From: Larry Winger To: zenith-list@matronics.com Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 9:00 AM Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Control cables for 601XL Juan, If you look at my first post, you'll see that I did call Zenith and that stimulated my question to the list. The person in the shop was almost positive they were using stainless steel. Obviously, I didn't get my answer from the designer or an engineer. Maybe that is my next step (or I can just use galvanized to be safe). Thanks, Larry Winger On 8/1/07, Juan Vega > wrote: > check with zenith but I beleieve I used GLAV 7x19 with 2000Lb strength versus SS7x19 with 1750 lbs strength. Jaun -----Original Message----- >From: Larry Winger < larrywinger@gmail.com> >Sent: Aug 1, 2007 12:30 AM >To: zenith-list@matronics.com >Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Control cables for 601XL > >I'm planning to purchase my cable from Aircraft Spruce, so I'm making an >assumption that it is aviation grade as you described. If so, any thoughts >on stainless steel in place of the specified galvanized? > >Larry Winger >601XL/Corvair >Tustin, CA > > >On 7/31/07, Juan Vega > wrote: >> amyvega2005@earthlink.net> >> >> use the 7x19 aviation grade. they are grease impregnated. >> >> Juan >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >From: lwinger < larrywinger@gmail.com> >> >Sent: Jul 31, 2007 6:29 PM >> >To: zenith-list@matronics.com >> >Subject: Zenith-List: Control cables for 601XL >> > > >> > >> >The plans (6-B-23) say 1/8" 7x19 Galvanized control cables. The folks in >> the shop at Zenith say they are using stainless steel. >> > >> >Stainless steel makes sense to me as well. Any reason not to use it? >> > >> >-------- >> >Larry Winger >> >Tustin, CA >> >601XL/Corvair from scratch >> >Control surfaces and wing spars complete >> >Making wing ribs >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >Read this topic online here: >> > >> >http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=126750#126750 >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 08:08:14 AM PST US From: "Joe" Subject: Zenith-List: Thrust angle in an XL with a Jabiru 3300 Craig, My engine measured 2.7 degrees down. I had Al Beyer from Oshkosh over to check it on the digital level. We decided to correct the problem. I sent my motor mount back to Jabaru and they brought a new one out to EAA for me. Jabaru found the top tubes were cut one inch too long! I had a talk with the owner of the company in when he was at the Neenah airport. He told me there were some early mounts out there that were made by a subcontractor in Wisconsin that were built wrong! Jabaru replace the mount for free, and was very gracious about it. Top notch people! I'm putting my engine on this week and I will let you know if the problem has been fixed. I would prefer to get as close to the plans as I can while shimming the engine down or neutral. Over the years the engine will compress the mounts and sink somewhat. Then I can shim it up over time. A heck of a lot better idea than to re-trim the cowl! Joe in Oshkosh ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 08:08:14 AM PST US From: "Joe" Subject: Zenith-List: Thrust angle in an XL with a Jabiru 3300 Craig, My engine measured 2.7 degrees down. I had Al Beyer from Oshkosh over to check it on the digital level. We decided to correct the problem. I sent my motor mount back to Jabaru and they brought a new one out to EAA for me. Jabaru found the top tubes were cut one inch too long! I had a talk with the owner of the company in when he was at the Neenah airport. He told me there were some early mounts out there that were made by a subcontractor in Wisconsin that were built wrong! Jabaru replace the mount for free, and was very gracious about it. Top notch people! I'm putting my engine on this week and I will let you know if the problem has been fixed. I would prefer to get as close to the plans as I can while shimming the engine down or neutral. Over the years the engine will compress the mounts and sink somewhat. Then I can shim it up over time. A heck of a lot better idea than to re-trim the cowl! Joe in Oshkosh ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 08:22:18 AM PST US From: "Dave Johnson" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Control cables for 601XL remember the leverage available, I reckon that the elevator has a leverage of about 2.5 to 1, so a pull of 200lbs will give a load of around 500lbs on the cable. The leverage on the rudder pedals is less, but you can exert a LOT more pressure with your feet! I weigh about 200lbs, when I go upstairs I am pressing with 200lbs with each foot in turn, without much effort - i would be able to push a lot harder than that with the right incentive. Dave Johnson 601XL do not archive ----- Original Message ----- From: paulrod36@msn.com To: zenith-list@matronics.com Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 3:44 PM Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Control cables for 601XL Sort of a side issue----- While I wouldn't advocate using string or safety wire for control cables, it does seem a bit of overkill to use a cable stronger than the max gross weight of the aircraft. It's not possible, even under high adrenalin situations, to exert anywhere near breaking strength of the cable, particularly sitting in the cockpit. If anything, you'd rip the control surface apart first, assuming you could maintain that much air load on the part. Same goes for turnbuckles. Do we really need 900 pound breaking-strength turnbuckles on an elevator we could put, at most, 200 pounds of backstick pull? Paul Rodriguez 601XL/Corvair Canopy getting close to done ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 08:24:19 AM PST US From: "Paul Hartl" Subject: Zenith-List: Is Dave Austin still on this list? Hi List, I have tried to contact Dave Austin about the use of Stolspeed's vortex generators on my HDS Zodiac, but Dave's old email address ( daveaustin2@can.rogers.com )bounces back. If you're still on the list Dave, or someone has Dave's new email address, please contact me off list. Thanks! Paul Hartl, N414PZ, 100 hrs Do not archive ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 09:39:31 AM PST US From: Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Control cables for 601XL More or less true, but consider a: how fast must you go to exert an over 200 pound air load on something as small as a rudder? b: Even if you were going that fast, you'd certainly bend the rudder or tear off the horn before failing the cable. It's something like fishing for trout with a tow truck and a log chain Paul R ----- Original Message ----- From: Dave Johnson To: zenith-list@matronics.com Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 10:19 AM Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Control cables for 601XL remember the leverage available, I reckon that the elevator has a leverage of about 2.5 to 1, so a pull of 200lbs will give a load of around 500lbs on the cable. The leverage on the rudder pedals is less, but you can exert a LOT more pressure with your feet! I weigh about 200lbs, when I go upstairs I am pressing with 200lbs with each foot in turn, without much effort - i would be able to push a lot harder than that with the right incentive. Dave Johnson 601XL do not archive ----- Original Message ----- From: paulrod36@msn.com To: zenith-list@matronics.com Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 3:44 PM Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Control cables for 601XL Sort of a side issue----- While I wouldn't advocate using string or safety wire for control cables, it does seem a bit of overkill to use a cable stronger than the max gross weight of the aircraft. It's not possible, even under high adrenalin situations, to exert anywhere near breaking strength of the cable, particularly sitting in the cockpit. If anything, you'd rip the control surface apart first, assuming you could maintain that much air load on the part. Same goes for turnbuckles. Do we really need 900 pound breaking-strength turnbuckles on an elevator we could put, at most, 200 pounds of backstick pull? Paul Rodriguez 601XL/Corvair Canopy getting close to done http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 09:55:28 AM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: XL Progress From: "PatrickW" Ordered the fuselage, landing gear, and controls kits from Zenith today. Yesterday I got my crankshaft back from the local machine shop. Tapped, magnaflux passed, 10/10 regrind, nitrided & polished. Also placed an order with Clarks Corvair for most of the remainder of my engine components like bearings, etc. All with the blessings of my wife. Neighbor's attempted intervention was for naught. Thanks for the help and advice everyone! Patrick XL/Corvair Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=127189#127189 ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 10:15:05 AM PST US From: Greg Kendall Subject: Zenith-List: Corvair engines Thanks to everyone for your comments.No one really addressed the absence of nitriding and why it took so long but I spoke to the A&P that services my 172 and he was really surprised that anyone would have sold engines without nitrided cranks. Stay with certified engines he says to avoid these self-professed experts who don't follow "best practices" in the industry and wait for an engine to fail to figure out what was obvious to any experienced A&P. One thing that bothered me but that I now think was just a setup is IP. I don't want to encourage any kind of patent violations so I tried to contact Wynne and never got a response just like my other messages. This tells me taht all the hoopla over that is just BS. If anyone has evidence that they are doing something wrong, please pass it on because I'm pretty close to ordering one of their engines. Seems like Microsoft has good company in thinking that competition is wrong from some of the e-mails I got. I haven't seen any patent or anything on Wynne's site so I have to wonder how much of this is being directed by wyyne hismelf to protect his monopoly. If he really invented anything, wouldn't he have patented it especially since he seems to make so much money on the engines? --------------------------------- Luggage? GPS? Comic books? Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search. ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 10:43:29 AM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Neighbor's tried to From: "ashontz" I was just going to say the same thing. Most likely the airline pilot is jealous this guy actually has time to work in his garage instead of being an all hours of the day and night flying bus driver. LOL do not archive amyvega2005(at)earthlink. wrote: > i have found that many people in this world do not like it when other people are enjoying life to the fullest and will project that by expressing their concerns to the person they see as someone who isdoing something they wish they could. Sad but true. > > juan > -- -------- Andy Shontz CH601XL - Corvair www.mykitlog.com/ashontz Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=127197#127197 ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 11:05:53 AM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Corvair engines From: "Papa Foxtrot" I think William's attitude is mainly driven by the number of times people have ripped him off - ordered parts, reversed engineered them and started selling on eBay. If you follow the Corvair email list, you'll note that this happens every 3 or 4 months. He probably does make a pretty good profit on a single engine, but, if you look at what it takes to run a business like his vs. the volume he's selling, then it's obvious that he ain't gettin' rich off this. Note that none of the rip-off competitors have flourished even with their lack of development costs. I don't know why he hasn't applied for patents on any of his original creations, other than to avoid giving more money to lawyers. Even if you hold a patent, to enforce it requires giving even more money to lawyers. Likely just not worth it to WW. I think the nitriding issue didn't really arise until the Corvair found its way into high performance aircraft - KR's/601's. The engine was so understressed in the Piet's, it wasn't a problem. Nitriding was being discussed by WW and the Corvair list about the time cranks started breaking. A better place to debate this would be on the Corvair list. Realize that it would be a historical debate tho', as conventional wisdom now concurs with your A&P's opinion. Just don't expect them to take an attack on WW kindly; even tho' there are several there that aren't too thrilled with his customer service performance. FWIW, the scuttlebutt is that it's getting better. IMO, if you want an off-the-shelf corvair conversion, then buy it from William. Just don't expect to get it tomorrow. Disclaimer - I have no connection to William Wynne. Not even a customer as this point, but prob'ly will be in the near future. gregnk8(at)yahoo.com wrote: > Thanks to everyone for your comments.No one really addressed the absence of nitriding and why it took so long but I spoke to the A&P that services my 172 and he was really surprised that anyone would have sold engines without nitrided cranks. Stay with certified engines he says to avoid these self-professed experts who don't follow "best practices" in the industry and wait for an engine to fail to figure out what was obvious to any experienced A&P. > One thing that bothered me but that I now think was just a setup is IP. I don't want to encourage any kind of patent violations so I tried to contact Wynne and never got a response just like my other messages. This tells me taht all the hoopla over that is just BS. If anyone has evidence that they are doing something wrong, please pass it on because I'm pretty close to ordering one of their engines. > Seems like Microsoft has good company in thinking that competition is wrong from some of the e-mails I got. I haven't seen any patent or anything on Wynne's site so I have to wonder how much of this is being directed by wyyne hismelf to protect his monopoly. If he really invented anything, wouldn't he have patented it especially since he seems to make so much money on the engines? > Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=127204#127204 ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 11:33:16 AM PST US From: Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Neighbor's tried to Here's a cute related story to lighten us all up a bit. An airliner makes a rather rough landing and as it is taxiing in, the big jet passes in front of a little Sonex holding short. The pilot of the airliner says over the ground control frequency, "What a cute little plane! Did you make it yourself?" Not missing the sarcasm, the Sonex driver says, "Yep, made it out of airliner parts. Another couple of landings like your last one and I'll be able to make another one". Dred Do Not Archive > amyvega2005(at)earthlink. wrote: > > i have found that many people in this world do not like it when other people are enjoying life to the fullest and will project that by expressing their concerns to the person they see as someone who isdoing something they wish they could. Sad but true. > > > > juan ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 11:40:25 AM PST US From: Crvsecretary@aol.com Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Corvair engines Greg: Not to criticize your information source, but an A&P is NOT the final authority in engine design or industry 'best practices'. He has opinions just like you and I, and with his training and background he is almost certainly going to embrace the Conti-Lycomo-Saurus dinosaurs that are in our certified airplanes. It is this predisposition to anything new that has kept our firewall-forward choices in the Dark Ages for so long. For instance, how many certificated Diamond Katanas were sold with the Rotax engine? Not all that many. Why? The established A&P crowd would not embrace anything new!! What is the dominant engine in the new Light Sport designs? Rotax ! It appears to me a lot of A&P's are going to be brought into the realm of LSA's kicking and screaming if they want to work in this part of aviation. OK, what is nitriding? It is a case-hardening of the crankshaft. A hard shell a couple of thousands thick. Is it a good idea? Sure, why not...but we'll let the engine designers answer that. Is it absolutly necessary for every aviation engine? No....look at all the early Corvair conversions and most any other auto conversion engine. I'm not convinced nitriding is the magic bullet to any crankshaft breakage issue. Finally, with regard to patents....do you have any idea how expensive it is to get a patent? Lawyers can only LEGALLY 'hold themselves out' (legal term there) as specialists in only two areas of law: Admiralty Law (The Law of the Seas) and Patent Law. I can assure you these guys do Not Work Cheap. I don't see a cost/benefit equasion working out here in favor of patent exploration, not to mention the issuance of a patent. Wynne holding a monopoly? I don't see it. If you want the benefits of his development activities, buy his product. Or go it alone. Tracy Smith 601XL tail, working on wings In a message dated 8/2/2007 12:16:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, gregnk8@yahoo.com writes: Thanks to everyone for your comments.No one really addressed the absence of nitriding and why it took so long but I spoke to the A&P that services my 172 and he was really surprised that anyone would have sold engines without nitrided cranks. Stay with certified engines he says to avoid these self-professed experts who don't follow "best practices" in the industry and wait for an engine to fail to figure out what was obvious to any experienced A&P. One thing that bothered me but that I now think was just a setup is IP. I don't want to encourage any kind of patent violations so I tried to contact Wynne and never got a response just like my other messages. This tells me taht all the hoopla over that is just BS. If anyone has evidence that they are doing something wrong, please pass it on because I'm pretty close to ordering one of their engines. Seems like Microsoft has good company in thinking that competition is wrong from some of the e-mails I got. I haven't seen any patent or anything on Wynne's site so I have to wonder how much of this is being directed by wyyne hismelf to protect his monopoly. If he really invented anything, wouldn't he have patented it especially since he seems to make so much money on the engines? http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 11:40:55 AM PST US From: "Craig Payne" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Corvair engines > surprised that anyone would have sold engines without nitrided cranks Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't believe the Jabiru cranks are nitrided either. According to the manual the cam and cam journals are. Not sure about the Rotax. -- Craig ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 12:00:15 PM PST US From: Bryan Martin Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Control cables for 601XL The overall breaking strength of the cable is not the only criteria involved. You want to have a generous safety factor built in and there is the matter of abrasion resistance. If the cable for some reason starts wearing against something to the extent that some of the wires in the cable are damaged, you don't want the cable to fail catastrophically before the damage can be discovered during an inspection on the ground. That's why there is a minimum size required for control cables on certificated aircraft. paulrod36@msn.com wrote: > Sort of a side issue----- While I wouldn't advocate using string or > safety wire for control cables, it does seem a bit of overkill to use a > cable stronger than the max gross weight of the aircraft. It's not > possible, even under high adrenalin situations, to exert anywhere near > breaking strength of the cable, particularly sitting in the cockpit. If > anything, you'd rip the control surface apart first, assuming you could > maintain that much air load on the part. Same goes for turnbuckles. Do > we really need 900 pound breaking-strength turnbuckles on an elevator we > could put, at most, 200 pounds of backstick pull? > -- Bryan Martin Zenith 601XL N61BM Ram Subaru, Stratus redrive Do Not Archive ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 12:04:25 PM PST US Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Corvair engines From: "Papa Foxtrot" Papa Foxtrot wrote: > Nitriding was being discussed by WW and the Corvair list about the time cranks started breaking. I read that after I typed it and didn't like the sound of it. It's not like cranks were snapping left and right. I know of only a couple of reported in-flight failures - not that I'm an "authority" on the subject. Mark Langford's was the most "famous"; mainly due to his penchant for putting everything on his web site. IIRC, even Mark allowed that his failure might have been caused by incorrect prop indexing. He's now "flying the pee out of" a 3100cc that he built from the pieces of his broken motor. Dif'rent case, crank(nitrided of course) and new internal wear parts, but most of the rest from his ill-fated first motor. I thinks Mark's proven that the 'vair is a tough little motor. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=127212#127212 ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 12:31:31 PM PST US From: Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Control cables for 601XL I'm not an A&P or an authority of any note but I have been told that these cables are overkill-sized in order to minimize their stretching and springing back and forth like a bungee. The concept as told to me is to have something (A) strong enough to be very unlikley to fail under tension loads, (B) heavy enough to withstand surface wear (as you mentioned), and also (C) dimensionally stable in the longitudinal axis to make tension adjustment feasible. Personally, I just trust that CH chose and or approved the choice of cable and apparently his planes aren't falling out of the sky due to cable failure. I'm reluctant to second guess the issue beyond that point. Just my two cents worth (and probably over-priced at that). Dred ---- Bryan Martin wrote: > > The overall breaking strength of the cable is not the only criteria > involved. You want to have a generous safety factor built in and there > is the matter of abrasion resistance. If the cable for some reason > starts wearing against something to the extent that some of the wires in > the cable are damaged, you don't want the cable to fail catastrophically > before the damage can be discovered during an inspection on the ground. > That's why there is a minimum size required for control cables on > certificated aircraft. ________________________________ Message 25 ____________________________________ Time: 12:47:38 PM PST US From: "C Smith" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: 10% from Wicks Where did you get the tip on the discount? I placed an order today online, and could not find any reference to this. CS Do not archive -----Original Message----- From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of ROBERT SCEPPA Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 4:46 PM Subject: Zenith-List: 10% from Wicks > Just a reminder: There's a 10% discount and free shipping until Friday > of this week from Wicks Aircraft.....Do not archive ________________________________ Message 26 ____________________________________ Time: 02:46:51 PM PST US From: "Aaron Gustafson" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 10% from Wicks I placed one today by phone and got. I think you have to mention Oshkosh though. Aaron ----- Original Message ----- From: "C Smith" Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 2:47 PM Subject: RE: Zenith-List: 10% from Wicks > > Where did you get the tip on the discount? I placed an order today online, > and could not find any reference to this. > CS > Do not archive > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of ROBERT SCEPPA > Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 4:46 PM > To: zenith-list@matronics.com > Subject: Zenith-List: 10% from Wicks > > > >> Just a reminder: There's a 10% discount and free shipping until Friday >> of this week from Wicks Aircraft.....Do not archive > > > -- > 4:53 PM > > ________________________________ Message 27 ____________________________________ Time: 03:51:00 PM PST US From: "Bill Naumuk" Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Corvair engines Greg- You have to realize that Corvairs weren't designed with flight in mind. Nevertheless, I believe nitriding makes sense. I base my statement on conversations with people that locally build NASCARs and top fuel dragsters. What doesn't make sense to any of these experts or myself is why you would want to weaken the crank with an undercut radius. The only structurally positive effect you can get is if the radius is rolled in from the OEM. I tend to agree with other Corvair builders- some "Fixes" are well founded, and some are knee-jerk reactions to current problems. This is EXPERIMENTAL aviation. YOU have to choose what expert's advice you agree with. Once again, I emphasize YOU. If you want a warranty and a guarantee, buy a Wichita product. do not archive Bill Naumuk HDS Fuse/Corvair Townville, Pa ----- Original Message ----- From: Greg Kendall To: zenith-list@matronics.com Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 1:13 PM Subject: Zenith-List: Corvair engines No one really addressed the absence of nitriding and why it took so long but I spoke to the A&P that services my 172 and he was really surprised that anyone would have sold engines without nitrided cranks. ________________________________ Message 28 ____________________________________ Time: 03:52:17 PM PST US From: "C Smith" Subject: RE: Zenith-List: 10% from Wicks Too bad that wasn't in the original post. -----Original Message----- From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Aaron Gustafson Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 5:46 PM Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 10% from Wicks --> I placed one today by phone and got. I think you have to mention Oshkosh though. Aaron ----- Original Message ----- From: "C Smith" Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 2:47 PM Subject: RE: Zenith-List: 10% from Wicks > > Where did you get the tip on the discount? I placed an order today online, > and could not find any reference to this. > CS > Do not archive > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of ROBERT SCEPPA > Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 4:46 PM > To: zenith-list@matronics.com > Subject: Zenith-List: 10% from Wicks > > > >> Just a reminder: There's a 10% discount and free shipping until Friday >> of this week from Wicks Aircraft.....Do not archive > > > -- > 4:53 PM > > ________________________________ Message 29 ____________________________________ Time: 03:59:22 PM PST US From: Juan Vega Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Control cables for 601XL sounds good, good luck. Juan -----Original Message----- >From: Larry Winger >Sent: Aug 1, 2007 10:00 AM >To: zenith-list@matronics.com >Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Control cables for 601XL > >Juan, > >If you look at my first post, you'll see that I did call Zenith and that >stimulated my question to the list. The person in the shop was almost >positive they were using stainless steel. Obviously, I didn't get my answer >from the designer or an engineer. Maybe that is my next step (or I can just >use galvanized to be safe). > >Thanks, >Larry Winger > > >On 8/1/07, Juan Vega wrote: >> >> >> check with zenith but I beleieve I used GLAV 7x19 with 2000Lb strength >> versus SS7x19 with 1750 lbs strength. >> Jaun >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >From: Larry Winger >> >Sent: Aug 1, 2007 12:30 AM >> >To: zenith-list@matronics.com >> >Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Control cables for 601XL >> > >> >I'm planning to purchase my cable from Aircraft Spruce, so I'm making an >> >assumption that it is aviation grade as you described. If so, any >> thoughts >> >on stainless steel in place of the specified galvanized? >> > >> >Larry Winger >> >601XL/Corvair >> >Tustin, CA >> > >> > >> >On 7/31/07, Juan Vega wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> use the 7x19 aviation grade. they are grease impregnated. >> >> >> >> Juan >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> >From: lwinger >> >> >Sent: Jul 31, 2007 6:29 PM >> >> >To: zenith-list@matronics.com >> >> >Subject: Zenith-List: Control cables for 601XL >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >The plans (6-B-23) say 1/8" 7x19 Galvanized control cables. The folks >> in >> >> the shop at Zenith say they are using stainless steel. >> >> > >> >> >Stainless steel makes sense to me as well. Any reason not to use it? >> >> > >> >> >-------- >> >> >Larry Winger >> >> >Tustin, CA >> >> >601XL/Corvair from scratch >> >> >Control surfaces and wing spars complete >> >> >Making wing ribs >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >Read this topic online here: >> >> > >> >> >http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=126750#126750 >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ________________________________ Message 30 ____________________________________ Time: 04:12:22 PM PST US From: "R.P." Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 10% from Wicks > > Too bad that wasn't in the original post. Call them back and ask for the discount. If they don't want to give it to you, cancel the order and re-order WITH the discount. I'm sure they'll work with you. Rick Pitcher > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Aaron > Gustafson > Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 5:46 PM > To: zenith-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Zenith-List: 10% from Wicks > > --> > > I placed one today by phone and got. I think you have to mention Oshkosh > though. > > Aaron > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "C Smith" > To: > Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 2:47 PM > Subject: RE: Zenith-List: 10% from Wicks > > >> >> Where did you get the tip on the discount? I placed an order today >> online, >> and could not find any reference to this. >> CS >> Do not archive >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com >> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of ROBERT >> SCEPPA >> Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 4:46 PM >> To: zenith-list@matronics.com >> Subject: Zenith-List: 10% from Wicks >> >> >> >>> Just a reminder: There's a 10% discount and free shipping until Friday >>> of this week from Wicks Aircraft.....Do not archive >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> 4:53 PM >> >> > > > -- > 4:53 PM > > ________________________________ Message 31 ____________________________________ Time: 04:45:03 PM PST US From: Afterfxllc@aol.com Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Corvair engines They break to. On a side note, I had a Chevy 4.3lL v 6 and I broke the crank. I then went and installed a new crank and wouldn't you know it guess what? You guessed it I broke another crank in the exact same place. I later found out what the cause was and it was the harmonic balancer. The point is that the more corvair's that get into the air the chances of one failing increases. It is our responsibility to find a fix for the problem and let everyone know what we find out. William has his faults but what he is trying to do is help us build the safest auto conversion out there and I for one will be helping get corvair's in the air and I am doing it with a lot of people telling me why I shouldn't. I'm glad the Wright brothers didn't listen to the doubters either. Jeff This is EXPERIMENTAL aviation. YOU have to choose what expert's advice you agree with. Once again, I emphasize YOU. If you want a warranty and a guarantee, buy a Wichita product. http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour ________________________________ Message 32 ____________________________________ Time: 04:48:00 PM PST US From: fred sanford Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Thrust angle in an XL with a Jabiru 3300 Hi Craig: I had an occasion to call Caleb at Zenith also. I told him that the pre-drilled factory side skin 6-B-11-2 had the wing at 81.8 degrees instead of the plans 81 degrees. He said that it was close enough. I told him that the bottom of the skin between the gear and the spar did not follow the plans. He said to force it. We ended up remaking both forward skins to conform to the plans. Your 4 degrees droop sounds like a lot to me. I'm not sure that Caleb understands the seriousness of properly building and flying your own plane. Just my opinion..................Fred Sanford............601XL riveting fuselage ________________________________ Message 33 ____________________________________ Time: 05:09:11 PM PST US From: Jerry Hey Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Thrust angle in an XL with a Jabiru 3300 I apologize for speaking about something I clearly am not qualified to speak about since I am just starting a 701 and have no knowledge of the Jibiru what so ever. However, I have been building engine mounts for a variety of aircraft for some time and I have never been asked to provide 4 degrees of down thrust. The range is from ZERO down thrust to 1.2 degrees. I can't recall any more than that. If the isolation dampeners are that soft, then I wonder about how badly the engine must be vibrating. Also, I don' t understand why a different engine would have a different thrust angle. The thrust angle is determined by the designer and then it is adhered to by the builder regardless of the engine. Just my opinion Jerry On Aug 2, 2007, at 7:47 PM, fred sanford wrote: > > Hi Craig: > I had an occasion to call Caleb at Zenith also. > I told him that the pre-drilled factory side skin 6-B-11-2 had the > wing at 81.8 degrees instead of the plans 81 degrees. He said that > it was close enough. > I told him that the bottom of the skin between the gear and the > spar did not follow the plans. He said to force it. > We ended up remaking both forward skins to conform to the plans. > Your 4 degrees droop sounds like a lot to me. > I'm not sure that Caleb understands the seriousness of properly > building and flying your own plane. > Just my opinion..................Fred Sanford............601XL > riveting fuselage > > ________________________________ Message 34 ____________________________________ Time: 06:40:39 PM PST US From: "kensmith@springnet1.com" Subject: Zenith-List: Neighbor's tried to Careful buddy.... I was one of those bus drivers, and today as I finish my 601XL I can attribute the experience and monatary measures to that position of "all hours" to be able to afford this hobby I have today. Incidently, Scheduled Carrier (121) only flys approximately 70 hours a month or we would be over "Regs". When I flew Corporate before Scheduled Aircarrier a lot of times I may have been away from home for several weeks at a time. The "Bus Driver Position" most always had me home when the schedule showed me off. Do not archive ashontz wrote: > >I was just going to say the same thing. Most likely the airline pilot is jealous this guy actually has time to work in his garage instead of being an all hours of the day and night flying bus driver. LOL > >do not archive > > >amyvega2005(at)earthlink. wrote: > > >>i have found that many people in this world do not like it when other people are enjoying life to the fullest and will project that by expressing their concerns to the person they see as someone who isdoing something they wish they could. Sad but true. >> >>juan >>-- >> >> > > >-------- >Andy Shontz >CH601XL - Corvair >www.mykitlog.com/ashontz > > >Read this topic online here: > >http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=127197#127197 > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message zenith-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/Zenith-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/zenith-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/zenith-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.