Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:51 AM - Re: 701 elevator trim option (kmccune)
2. 04:05 AM - Re: 701 elevator trim option (stepinwolf)
3. 04:15 AM - Re: Long wing (kmccune)
4. 04:18 AM - Re: Long wing (stepinwolf)
5. 04:19 AM - Re: Long wing (kmccune)
6. 04:55 AM - Re: Re: Long wing (Robert Pelland)
7. 05:27 AM - Re: Long wing (Randall J. Hebert)
8. 05:59 AM - Re: 701 elevator trim option (kmccune)
9. 06:03 AM - Re: Long wing (kmccune)
10. 06:06 AM - Re: Long wing (Robert Pelland)
11. 06:11 AM - Re: insurance (mcjon77)
12. 06:34 AM - Re: Re: 701 elevator trim option (Robert Pelland)
13. 06:41 AM - Re: insurance (Paul Tipton)
14. 07:23 AM - "Xtra pistons" (george.mueller@aurora.org)
15. 07:50 AM - Re: Long wing (relentless12)
16. 08:31 AM - Re: Re: Long wing (Robert Pelland)
17. 08:52 AM - Re: Re: Long wing (John Bolding)
18. 09:48 AM - Re: Re: Long wing (LarryMcFarland)
19. 10:05 AM - Re: Re: Long wing (Robert Pelland)
20. 02:20 PM - Re: "Xtra pistons" (Graeme@cole)
21. 02:32 PM - Re: "Xtra pistons" (James Sagerser)
22. 05:01 PM - Re: Re: Long wing (Gary Gower)
23. 05:09 PM - Re: "Xtra pistons" (Graeme@cole)
24. 05:58 PM - Re: Re: Long wing (Robert Pelland)
25. 06:09 PM - Re: Re: 701 elevator trim option (Bob Percival)
26. 06:38 PM - Re: 701 long wing (Dave and Pam Fisher)
27. 07:40 PM - Re: Re: 701 long wing (Robert Pelland)
28. 08:06 PM - Finishing 4130 welded parts (JohnDRead@aol.com)
29. 10:21 PM - Re: Re: insurance (Les Goldner)
30. 11:02 PM - Re: "Xtra pistons" (jetboy)
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: 701 elevator trim option |
Yes I would like to see pics of a manual trim also.
Kevin
do nt archive
--------
Mark Twain: Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that
you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail
away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream.
Discover.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=232190#232190
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 701 elevator trim option |
Count me in also, for any info on a manual trim setup. I had been thinking about
this option for some time, and I'm glad to see that I'm not alone
Robert
701 & 750 Scratch
--------
Live each day, as if it was your last
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=232191#232191
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 |
|
Here is a pic of a Savannah wing. The Spar doubler is .025 instead of .032 and
it is about 500mm longer I also have the instructions to upgrade the Savannah
to 1200 gross they do not include changing the doubler. Mostly the attach point
and some mods to the fuselage.Also attached is the extended spar on a 701.
I have a folder called long wing share for anyone interested, to big to post here.
Kevin
john.marzulli(at)gmail.co wrote:
> Looking those drawings the date in the corner is October of 1992 and the plans
reference the 701UL.
>
> I wonder if these drawings will still hold for the increased gross of the newer
plans.
>
>
> DO NOT ARCHIVE
> John Marzulli
>
>
--------
Mark Twain: Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that
you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail
away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream.
Discover.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=232192#232192
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/longer_spar_tip_small_544.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/savannah_wing_from_savannah_ca_site_114.jpg
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 |
|
Randall, It looks' as though my attempt to merge my reply to your previous message
was not a success, so I will try this once again.
Robert
I am a little younger than you (9 months)
Nine months makes you close enough to be in my club. :o) welcome
I think the question posed earlier was are you planning to add the 16 inches inboard
of the slats.
I am a little confused about your use of the word " slats " . Should I read that
as being " struts " rather then your use of slats, if that is the case, yes,
inboard of the strut attachment on the wing
Meaning will you be building a longer SPAR?
I have already cut the spars out of .032 to a total length of 3660m
One response asked if you were using the Zenith spar or are you building one from
scratch.
I am riveting my own. I purchased a 3X from " Cleveland ", along with their new
12" back rivet setter, and first impressions are very positive
The answer lies in the method of construction. Since the sketch was for the tip
end or outboard end it simply added an extender.
The tip end is not structurally attached.
That is one reason I am not inclined to go with anything that does not add structurally
to the wing. I also plan on extending my spar caps as far into the spar
tip as I can
Adding 16 Inboard or at the root can only be accomplished if you are building from
scratch.
Definitely from scratch. My disability pension dictate's it can't be done otherwise
There are structural issues that you need to be aware of if this is so
Randall, as you can see, " This is so " so would you care to elaborate on what
additional issues I should know about. ?
I will speak to you later this evening, because I am going into my " hanger " (
read that as being my basement ) to skin my stabilizer. This is also something
to which I added my own touch. For what it's worth, the mods I have made to
the stab, were done before the plans for the 750, were made available. Check
attached pic for the two views
Robert Pelland
701 & 750 Scratch
Trois Rivires, Qubec
819 377-2492
Thank you for your input, and fly safe
--------
Live each day, as if it was your last
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=232193#232193
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 |
|
Robert why the reinforcement on the stabilizer?
Kevin
--------
Mark Twain: Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that
you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail
away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream.
Discover.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=232194#232194
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 |
|
Good morning Kevin,
I am not quite sure what reinforcement you are referring to, since I
posted a photo showing two different configuration of the stabs, that
are not quite like the factory design for the 701.
If you are referring to the short 45 degree angles I riveted to the tip
ribs on the original model, it was simply done to keep everything
squared up perfectly for the skinning. These small sections have no use
what so ever, once the skin is in place and riveted correctly.
On the other hand if it's the double spar modification you are talking
about, I reinforced the stab in this way to try and diminish the
destructive actions caused by the violent shaking that is seen at low
engine speed, or when it is flown from the water. I also replaced the A4
rivets with the stronger A5 on the tip ribs, since these ribs are all
that hold the outer hinges to the stabilizer
My original thoughts were that it most certainly be much more resilient
in this way, and it seems that my impressions were not far off. The
reason I say this is because not long after assembling the stab in this
fashion, I received my plans for the 750, only to see that the factory
had re-designed the stabilizer for the new CH-750 in the exact same way
I built mine for the 701, albeit mine is the standard length. There is
a very small weight increase, but you would not believe how strong the
bare frame is, as compared to the standard build.
Hope this answers your question, :o)
Best regards
Robert Pelland
The 701 & 750 Scratch
----- Original Message -----
From: kmccune
To: zenith701801-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 7:19 AM
Subject: Zenith701801-List: Re: Long wing
<kmccune@somtel.net>
Robert why the reinforcement on the stabilizer?
Kevin
--------
Mark Twain: Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the
things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the
bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your
sails. Explore. Dream. Discover.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=232194#232194
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 |
|
This is not the first time I have confused the s-word
Slats, struts, spars etc.
No I meant inboard of the struts i.e. at the root
Since you are scratch building and have beefed up the web there are no
issues I have.
The way the earlier posts sounded I thought you would be modifying the
root end of the spar.
At any rate you sound as though you have it under control. Keep in
touch
Randall J Hebert
From: owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Robert Pelland
Randall,
See imbedded text below
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: 701 elevator trim option |
Funny thing is I program, modify and repair automated machinery and the one thing
its taught me is simple is better!
Here is what I was thinking of using.
Kevin
--------
Mark Twain: Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that
you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail
away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream.
Discover.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=232202#232202
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/trim_system_2289_298.jpg
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 |
|
Yup it does and now I kinda wish I'd done it, but too late!
Thanks
Do not archive
stepinwolf wrote:
>
> Hope this answers your question, :o)
>
> Best regards
> Robert Pelland
> The 701 & 750 Scratch
>
>
>
>
>
> ---
--------
Mark Twain: Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that
you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail
away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream.
Discover.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=232204#232204
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 |
|
Randall,
Don't feel bad about any confusion, age does that to us you know. ;o)
I am not planning anything major at the root end of the wing ( kind'a
like leave well enough alone ) but I am considering two small changes
that would have a long term benefit to the strength of the attachment
points.
The 701 has the following
Upper front strut fitting t=.125
Rear root doubler t=.090
Spar root fitting t- .187
The 750 is using the following thickness, and for a very little increase
in weight, it is something I am considering
Upper front strut fitting t= .187
Rear root doubler t= .125
Spar root fitting t= .25
Thank's for your encouraging words. I will be posting a s*** load of
pics, when the time comes to start assembling ( still a little ways off
) the main wings.
Most of my apprehensions about the modifications, and extended wing,
disappeared after speaking to Caleb, a month or so ago, since his
remarque's sounded as though what I was considering was an everyday, run
of the mill thingy.
You have my best regards
Robert W. Pelland
----- Original Message -----
From: Randall J. Hebert
To: zenith701801-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 8:21 AM
Subject: RE: Zenith701801-List: Long wing
This is not the first time I have confused the s-word
Slats, struts, spars etc.
No I meant inboard of the struts i.e. at the root
Since you are scratch building and have beefed up the web there are no
issues I have.
The way the earlier posts sounded I thought you would be modifying the
root end of the spar.
At any rate you sound as though you have it under control. Keep in
touch
Randall J Hebert
From: owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Robert Pelland
Randall,
See imbedded text below
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 |
|
Falcon Insurance. They are the company that EAA promotes. I spoke with Bob Mackey
from falcon regarding getting my Sonex insured after completion. Those guys
know their stuff when it comes to getting an experimental insured. He gave
me several good pieces of advice:
1) Pick a known and well regarded kit. He specifically mentioned Zenith, Sonex,
Van's, and Ran's. So if you are building a 701 you made a great choice!
2) Talk to your agent early. Don't come calling the day before you want to make
your first flight asking about getting coverage. It may be very difficult to
get coverage that way.
3)Take advantage of the EAA flight adviser program. This program seams to be held
in high regard.
4)Get some time in type. This can be formal transition training or simply "orientation
" training where you get some right seat time in another persons 701.
If you can't get some 701 time finding a similar aircraft (like a 750) can work
as well.
Hope this helps.
--------
Jon McDonald
Building Sonex #1287
Thinking ahead about a Zenith CH 701 :D
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=232209#232209
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: 701 elevator trim option |
Kevin,
I like the photo of manual trim control mechanism you posted, but my
main worry would be how quick changes could be made in case of a "
go-around ".
I actually started looking at a system for manually controlling the trim
tab to get away from the delay that is seen when using an electric trim
controller. I would expect that the one you have just included in your
response, might take quite a few turns ( I only have two hands ) to get
the trim back to it's take off position.
My past experience ( although limited ) has taught me that when landing
in conditions that are not necessarily ideal, my two hand and two feet
are very busy, so I would not want to be obliged to have to spend too
much time turning the knob one way or the other, to try and get the trim
tab, back to it's take off position. However in straight and level
flight, the use of a screw type of controller would make fine tuning a
pleasure.
Maby it's just me,,,, and thank's for the pic :o)
regards
Robert
----- Original Message -----
From: kmccune
To: zenith701801-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 8:59 AM
Subject: Zenith701801-List: Re: 701 elevator trim option
<kmccune@somtel.net>
Funny thing is I program, modify and repair automated machinery and
the one thing its taught me is simple is better!
Here is what I was thinking of using.
Kevin
--------
Mark Twain: Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the
things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the
bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your
sails. Explore. Dream. Discover.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=232202#232202
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/trim_system_2289_298.jpg
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 |
|
Falcon Insurance... 1-866-647-4322 especially if you are a member of EAA
and if your not you should be.
They are nice people and will work with you.
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 |
|
I am anticipating putting my 701 on floats. Originally I was going to
sell my 80hp 912UL and buy the 912ULS 100hp. However I have come across a
guy who sells high compression forged pistons (called Xtra) for the 912UL
that adds 10-15 horsepower. The cost is about $850 for the pistons. This
seems to be a more cost effective way to get the extra horsepower for
floats (although I have heard from guys with the 80 hp Rotax on floats and
they say it really is OK unless you are flying out of really small ponds).
Does anyone have any experience with the Xtra pistons? The Xtra guy says
he has sold 800 sets of these pistons worldwide. Is there any downside
other than voiding the rotax warranty?
George in Milwaukee
N701GM 60 hour flying
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 |
|
Hey Robert
How thick is the front stabilizer reinforcement... 0.025 or 0.032 [Exclamation]
Ron
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=232229#232229
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 |
|
Ron,
I made mine out of .020, since I am not using any .016 anywhere on my
701 build.
As for the 750, I figure due to it's increased width, and weight of the
aircraft, the factory chose to use .025 on the front, and .032, in the
rear.
regards
Robert
----- Original Message -----
From: relentless12
To: zenith701801-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 10:47 AM
Subject: Zenith701801-List: Re: Long wing
<infow@mts.net>
Hey Robert
How thick is the front stabilizer reinforcement... 0.025 or 0.032
[Exclamation]
Ron
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=232229#232229
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 |
|
Couple of yrs ago someone on this list figured the square footage of the
016 on the 701 and determined that using 020 everywhere would cost you
68# of payload, I didn't double check his figures but if I was going to
do it I sure would. Also gonna move the CG to the rear.
LO&SLO John
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Pelland
To: zenith701801-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 10:27 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith701801-List: Re: Long wing
Ron,
I made mine out of .020, since I am not using any .016 anywhere on my
701 build.
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 |
|
John,
Solid aluminum is 165 lbs per cubic foot. Divide that by 12 to get an
inch by 12 x 12 or 13.75 lbs divided by 1000 to get weight per
1/1000-inch or .0138 times the difference in thickness between .016 and
.020 which is .004 and you get .055 lbs added per square foot. If you
only use the 122 sq ft wing area, both top and bottom add up to less
than 14 lbs. I dont know the total area of the 701 in .016, but the
weight added is easy from here.
Id suppose you might consider more pitch or more hp for the weight
added though.
Larry McFarland 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com
John Bolding wrote:
> Couple of yrs ago someone on this list figured the square footage of
> the 016 on the 701 and determined that using 020 everywhere would cost
> you 68# of payload, I didn't double check his figures but if I was
> going to do it I sure would. Also gonna move the CG to the rear.
> LO&SLO John
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Robert Pelland <mailto:robert.pelland@cgocable.ca>
> *To:* zenith701801-list@matronics.com
> <mailto:zenith701801-list@matronics.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 26, 2009 10:27 AM
> *Subject:* Re: Zenith701801-List: Re: Long wing
>
> Ron,
> I made mine out of .020, since I am not using any .016 anywhere on
> my 701 build.
>
> *
>
> *
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 |
|
Good day John, and Larry,
Here is what I would like to ad to the discussion
I had looked into the weight issue a little while back, and was just
able to find the manufacturing specs that were given me when I made the
purchase.
The 4x12 sheet of 6061 in .016, weighs in at a total of 10.83 lbs/per
sheet
The 4x12 sheet of 6061 in .020, weighs in at a total of 13.55 lbs/per
sheet
The difference being 2.72 lbs per sheet. Most BOM's specify that a
total of between 12 to 13 sheets of .016 are used ( not wasted ) in the
complete build of the 701. Using these figures, I should end up with an
additional weight of 35.36 lbs .
Personally I don't think that it is a large penalty to pay for an
approximate increase in strength of 25% over the total airframe. Add to
the fact that it's use will most certainly all but eliminate the oil
canning that is normally seen, not to mention the creases that can be
observed during flight on the main wing sections, with the factory
airplane.
I just feel that for myself, the extra 35 lbs is something I can live
with. Something else I had not originally consider is the wing loading,
which even with the additional weight, will be much less then a factory
built 701, by using my extended wings.
They say variety is the spice of life. :o)
regards
Robert
----- Original Message -----
From: John Bolding
To: zenith701801-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 11:51 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith701801-List: Re: Long wing
Couple of yrs ago someone on this list figured the square footage of
the 016 on the 701 and determined that using 020 everywhere would cost
you 68# of payload, I didn't double check his figures but if I was going
to do it I sure would. Also gonna move the CG to the rear.
LO&SLO John
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Pelland
To: zenith701801-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 10:27 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith701801-List: Re: Long wing
Ron,
I made mine out of .020, since I am not using any .016 anywhere on
my 701 build.
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 |
|
| From: | "Graeme@cole" <graeme@coletoolcentre.com.au> |
| Subject: | Re: "Xtra pistons" |
I have a set of 912xtra pistons there was a definate incresase in power
you change the plugs you use std rotax rings expensive.
if you can get them try
http://www.experimentalfuelinjection.com/wst_page9.php
they come with rings to suit about the same price as 912xtra but may
notice a tiny bit more power than912xtra
Graemecns
----- Original Message -----
From: george.mueller@aurora.org
To: zenith701801-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2009 1:18 AM
Subject: Zenith701801-List: "Xtra pistons"
I am anticipating putting my 701 on floats. Originally I was going to
sell my 80hp 912UL and buy the 912ULS 100hp. However I have come across
a guy who sells high compression forged pistons (called Xtra) for the
912UL that adds 10-15 horsepower. The cost is about $850 for the
pistons. This seems to be a more cost effective way to get the extra
horsepower for floats (although I have heard from guys with the 80 hp
Rotax on floats and they say it really is OK unless you are flying out
of really small ponds). Does anyone have any experience with the Xtra
pistons? The Xtra guy says he has sold 800 sets of these pistons
worldwide. Is there any downside other than voiding the rotax warranty?
George in Milwaukee
N701GM 60 hour flying
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
02/25/09 06:40:00
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: | Re: "Xtra pistons" |
Don't know if auto gas is important to you or not but the higher compression
engine might eliminate that option. Something to consider.
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 8:18 AM, <george.mueller@aurora.org> wrote:
>
> I am anticipating putting my 701 on floats. Originally I was going to sell
> my 80hp 912UL and buy the 912ULS 100hp. However I have come across a guy
> who sells high compression forged pistons (called Xtra) for the 912UL that
> adds 10-15 horsepower. The cost is about $850 for the pistons. This seems
> to be a more cost effective way to get the extra horsepower for floats
> (although I have heard from guys with the 80 hp Rotax on floats and they say
> it really is OK unless you are flying out of really small ponds). Does
> anyone have any experience with the Xtra pistons? The Xtra guy says he has
> sold 800 sets of these pistons worldwide. Is there any downside other than
> voiding the rotax warranty?
>
>
> George in Milwaukee
> N701GM 60 hour flying
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
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 |
|
Is better to carry 35 lbs of gasoline than in aluminum,- also the oil can
ning is the best "instructor" you can hire, to teach you to keep the ball c
entered-:-)
-
Saludos
Gary Gower.
701 912S 235 hrs-
almost no oil canning... -recently- :-)
-
--- On Thu, 2/26/09, Robert Pelland <robert.pelland@cgocable.ca> wrote:
From: Robert Pelland <robert.pelland@cgocable.ca>
Subject: Re: Zenith701801-List: Re: Long wing
Good day John, and Larry,
-
Here is what I would like to ad to the discussion
-
I had looked into the weight issue a little while back, and was just able t
o find the manufacturing specs that were given me when I made the purchase.
-
The 4x12 sheet of 6061 in .016, weighs in at a total of 10.83 lbs/per sheet
-
The 4x12 sheet of 6061 in .020, weighs in at a total of 13.55 lbs/per sheet
-
The difference being 2.72 lbs per sheet.- Most BOM's specify that a total
of between 12 to 13 sheets of .016 are used ( not wasted ) in the complete
build of the 701.- Using these figures, I should end up with an addition
al weight of 35.36 lbs .
-
Personally I don't think that it is a large penalty to pay for an approxima
te increase in strength of 25% over the total airframe. Add to the fact tha
t it's use will most certainly all but eliminate the oil canning that is no
rmally seen, not to mention the creases that can be observed during flight
on the main wing sections,-with the factory airplane.
-
I just feel that for myself, the extra 35 lbs is something I can live with.
- Something else I had not originally-consider is the wing loading, whi
ch even with the additional weight, will be much less then a factory built
701, by using my-extended wings.
-
They say variety is the spice of life. :o)
-
regards
Robert
-
-
----- Original Message -----
From: John Bolding
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 11:51 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith701801-List: Re: Long wing
Couple of yrs ago someone on this list figured the square footage of the 01
6 on the-701 and determined that using 020 everywhere would cost you 68#
of payload, I didn't double check his figures but if I was going to do it I
sure would. Also gonna move the CG to the rear.
LO&SLO--- John
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Pelland
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 10:27 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith701801-List: Re: Long wing
Ron,
-
I made mine out of .020, since I am not using any .016-anywhere-on my
-701 build.-
-
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith701801-List">http://www.ma
tronics.com/Navigator?Zenith701801-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
=0A=0A=0A
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 |
|
| From: | "Graeme@cole" <graeme@coletoolcentre.com.au> |
| Subject: | Re: "Xtra pistons" |
Ref High compression 912xtra pistons
I have to use Premium unleaded
Graemecns
----- Original Message -----
From: James Sagerser
To: zenith701801-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2009 8:29 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith701801-List: "Xtra pistons"
Don't know if auto gas is important to you or not but the higher
compression engine might eliminate that option. Something to consider.
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 8:18 AM, <george.mueller@aurora.org> wrote:
I am anticipating putting my 701 on floats. Originally I was going
to sell my 80hp 912UL and buy the 912ULS 100hp. However I have come
across a guy who sells high compression forged pistons (called Xtra) for
the 912UL that adds 10-15 horsepower. The cost is about $850 for the
pistons. This seems to be a more cost effective way to get the extra
horsepower for floats (although I have heard from guys with the 80 hp
Rotax on floats and they say it really is OK unless you are flying out
of really small ponds). Does anyone have any experience with the Xtra
pistons? The Xtra guy says he has sold 800 sets of these pistons
worldwide. Is there any downside other than voiding the rotax warranty?
George in Milwaukee
N701GM 60 hour flying
ist"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith701801-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
02/25/09 06:40:00
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 |
|
Gary,
I'm glad to see I would be able to carry an additional 35 lbs ( 6.03
gallons ) of gasoline. However, once my tanks are full, and I'm still a
few hundred pounds below gross weight, where would I put it. ?
As I mentioned previously Gary, variety is the spice of life.
regards
Robert Pelland
P.S. After more then two hundred hours in the pilots seat, I have long
ago figured out, how to keep the ball centered, so I don't have to sit
in a tin can listening to it rattle, to realize my turns are not
coordinated.
Fly safe amigo :o)
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Gower
To: zenith701801-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 7:59 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith701801-List: Re: Long wing
Is better to carry 35 lbs of gasoline than in aluminum, also
the oil canning is the best "instructor" you can hire, to teach you to
keep the ball centered :-)
Saludos
Gary Gower.
701 912S 235 hrs
almost no oil canning... recently :-)
--- On Thu, 2/26/09, Robert Pelland <robert.pelland@cgocable.ca>
wrote:
From: Robert Pelland <robert.pelland@cgocable.ca>
Subject: Re: Zenith701801-List: Re: Long wing
To: zenith701801-list@matronics.com
Date: Thursday, February 26, 2009, 1:02 PM
Good day John, and Larry,
Here is what I would like to ad to the discussion
I had looked into the weight issue a little while back, and
was just able to find the manufacturing specs that were given me when I
made the purchase.
The 4x12 sheet of 6061 in .016, weighs in at a total of 10.83
lbs/per sheet
The 4x12 sheet of 6061 in .020, weighs in at a total of 13.55
lbs/per sheet
The difference being 2.72 lbs per sheet. Most BOM's specify
that a total of between 12 to 13 sheets of .016 are used ( not wasted )
in the complete build of the 701. Using these figures, I should end up
with an additional weight of 35.36 lbs .
Personally I don't think that it is a large penalty to pay for
an approximate increase in strength of 25% over the total airframe. Add
to the fact that it's use will most certainly all but eliminate the oil
canning that is normally seen, not to mention the creases that can be
observed during flight on the main wing sections, with the factory
airplane.
I just feel that for myself, the extra 35 lbs is something I
can live with. Something else I had not originally consider is the wing
loading, which even with the additional weight, will be much less then a
factory built 701, by using my extended wings.
They say variety is the spice of life. :o)
regards
Robert
----- Original Message -----
From: John Bolding
To: zenith701801-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 11:51 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith701801-List: Re: Long wing
Couple of yrs ago someone on this list figured the square
footage of the 016 on the 701 and determined that using 020 everywhere
would cost you 68# of payload, I didn't double check his figures but if
I was going to do it I sure would. Also gonna move the CG to the rear.
LO&SLO John
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Pelland
To: zenith701801-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 10:27 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith701801-List: Re: Long wing
Ron,
I made mine out of .020, since I am not using any .016
anywhere on my 701 build.
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith701801-List">http://www.
matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith701801-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
ist" target=_blank
rel=nofollow>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith701801-List
=nofollow>http://forums.matronics.com
blank rel=nofollow>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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: | Re: 701 elevator trim option |
I'm also interested in the mechanical trim details.
Also - those of you who have extended the trim, how much?
I think Gary Gower went 2x the plan length. What have others done?
Thanks
Bob Percival
701/Vair
Do Not Archive
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: 701 long wing |
Hi guys,
I think the drawing John is talking about is probably a sketch that Chris
sent me in response to my request to extend each wing by one foot for
better high altitude operation.( Naturally aspirated engine performance as
well as take off and climb performance degrades by about 4% per thousand
feet due to the thinner air, I believe.) I've not yet done the mod but I
intend to and I'd be very interested in seeing the 1992 701 UL sketch that
you have, Robert, could you E-Mail me a copy? I'm also planning a slat
less wing with VGs on both the wings and the elevator. In addition,
I'm considering a "cuff " that would put the wing nose profile midway
between the wing with slats and the wing without but have not yet asked the
factory about the " cuff ". Has anyone done anything like this? I'd like
to maintain as much wing area as possible without shifting the center of
lift too far forward.
Thanks!
Dave, 701 with A-80-8 Continental
At 12:58 AM 2/26/2009, you wrote:
>From: "John Bolding" <jnbolding1@teleshare.net>
>Subject: Re: Zenith701801-List: Long wing
>
>Excellent point,
> I have a drawing from CH that shows basically the same treatment on the
>tip but the main structural change was lengthening the doubler at the
>strut attach point and increasing it's thickness,
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: 701 long wing |
Dave,
Here it is, however don't expect too much, so as not to be disappointed.
Robert Pelland
----- Original Message -----
From: Dave and Pam Fisher
To: zenith701801-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 9:29 PM
Subject: Zenith701801-List: Re: 701 long wing
<dpfisher@scottsbluff.net>
Hi guys,
I think the drawing John is talking about is probably a sketch that
Chris
sent me in response to my request to extend each wing by one foot for
better high altitude operation.( Naturally aspirated engine
performance as
well as take off and climb performance degrades by about 4% per
thousand
feet due to the thinner air, I believe.) I've not yet done the mod
but I
intend to and I'd be very interested in seeing the 1992 701 UL sketch
that
you have, Robert, could you E-Mail me a copy? I'm also planning a
slat
less wing with VGs on both the wings and the elevator. In addition,
I'm considering a "cuff " that would put the wing nose profile midway
between the wing with slats and the wing without but have not yet
asked the
factory about the " cuff ". Has anyone done anything like this? I'd
like
to maintain as much wing area as possible without shifting the center
of
lift too far forward.
Thanks!
Dave, 701 with A-80-8 Continental
At 12:58 AM 2/26/2009, you wrote:
>From: "John Bolding" <jnbolding1@teleshare.net>
>Subject: Re: Zenith701801-List: Long wing
>
>Excellent point,
> I have a drawing from CH that shows basically the same treatment on
the
>tip but the main structural change was lengthening the doubler at the
>strut attach point and increasing it's thickness,
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: | Finishing 4130 welded parts |
I was thinking of having the 4130 parts powder coated but I am worried that
the oven baking may change the temper of the parts. Is there another method
of coating the steel parts that will stand up to wear and tear?
John Read
CH701 - Elbert CO - Jabiru 3300
Phone: 303-648-3261
Fax: 303-648-3262
Cell: 719-494-4567
**************Get a jump start on your taxes. Find a tax professional in your
neighborhood today.
(http://yellowpages.aol.com/search?query=Tax+Return+Preparation+%26+Filing&ncid=emlcntusyelp00000004)
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 |
|
Falcon was a few hundred more than the insurance I got from Travers &
Associates in St. Louis. I insured my 701 for $50,000 damage to the plane as
well as the liability required by my airport.
Les
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith701801-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of mcjon77
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 6:12 AM
Subject: Zenith701801-List: Re: insurance
Falcon Insurance. They are the company that EAA promotes. I spoke with Bob
Mackey from falcon regarding getting my Sonex insured after completion.
Those guys know their stuff when it comes to getting an experimental
insured. He gave me several good pieces of advice:
1) Pick a known and well regarded kit. He specifically mentioned Zenith,
Sonex, Van's, and Ran's. So if you are building a 701 you made a great
choice!
2) Talk to your agent early. Don't come calling the day before you want to
make your first flight asking about getting coverage. It may be very
difficult to get coverage that way.
3)Take advantage of the EAA flight adviser program. This program seams to
be held in high regard.
4)Get some time in type. This can be formal transition training or simply
"orientation " training where you get some right seat time in another
persons 701. If you can't get some 701 time finding a similar aircraft
(like a 750) can work as well.
Hope this helps.
--------
Jon McDonald
Building Sonex #1287
Thinking ahead about a Zenith CH 701 :D
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=232209#232209
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: "Xtra pistons" |
Are you aware its possible to turbocharge the 80hp 912 - making it a similar engine
to the 914 - the makers of the Xenos gyroplanes do this for some of their
models, claiming 122hp for modest cost.
Obviously you have to dial in your own tradeoff of power vs. reliability here,
and you wont get the sophistication of the 914 TCU or an over the counter bolt
on solution, its my preferred powerup path for the 912UL.
Ralph
--------
Ralph - CH701 / 2200a
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=232304#232304
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! --
|