Serious STOL fun

wrote

After reading a detailed pilot report of it with 100, I've decided 80
is fine. I'm going for a VW, 2149 cc. Nitrided crank. "Geared down"
with one of Great Plain's pulleys. More thrust, power 80 to 100

You need to do some reading over in rec.aviation.homebuilt. A guy over
there will tell you that a VW can not do that many HP continuous, and for
good reason, I think.

Try this link, http://bobhooversblog.blogspot.com and read "The Christmas
Engine" (I think that is the name of the article)
--
Jim in NC

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

wrote

After reading a detailed pilot report of it with 100, I've decided 80
is fine. I'm going for a VW, 2149 cc. Nitrided crank. "Geared down"
with one of Great Plain's pulleys. More thrust, power 80 to 100

You need to do some reading over in rec.aviation.homebuilt. A guy over
there will tell you that a VW can not do that many HP continuous, and for
good reason, I think.

Try this link, http://bobhooversblog.blogspot.com and read "The
Christmas Engine" (I think that is the name of the article)
--
Jim in NC


I also believe that he is about the best source--if you want th fly behind a
VW and also live to be quite old.

Peter

You need to do some reading over in rec.aviation.homebuilt. *A guy over
there will tell you that a VW can not do that many HP continuous, and for
good reason, I think.

Try this link, http://bobhooversblog.blogspot.com and read "The Christmas
Engine" (I think that is the name of the article)
--
Jim in NC

Well, I didn't say it could.

I've read that too, and I don't doubt it.

You need to do some reading over in rec.aviation.homebuilt. *A guy over
there will tell you that a VW can not do that many HP continuous, and for
good reason, I think.

Try this link, http://bobhooversblog.blogspot.com and read "The Christmas
Engine" (I think that is the name of the article)
--
Jim in NC

Well, there's always a guy somewhere on the internet that will tell
you something for free.

I don't like articles about car engines that try to draw analogies to
sex. That doesn't tell you jack-all from a technical standpoint.
Absolutely worth zero except yah, if you build an engine yourself you
can expect to maintain it yourself, and you'll have to put in a lot of
hours -- it's like changing diapers. Not quite the same, in my view. I
like working on engines but surely did not like changing diapers. If
you're the builder, and you're the one who does the maintenance on the
engine, you're going to be working on it regardless of what kind it
is.

Technical matters demand a technical approach, not weak analogies. The
kind of technical writing on the internet that I respect is the kind
of stuff William Wynn puts out about Corvairs, for instance.

Try this link, http://bobhooversblog.blogspot.com and read "The Christmas
Engine" (I think that is the name of the article)
--
Jim in NC

Okay, found the Christmas Engine.

Much better!

On Jan 28, 7:26*am, wrote:
C'on Jim, it's not so ugly. *Looks like a Jeep Willy of the sky to me,
and I think the Willy's jeeps look great. *My plan is to one day get a
C150, I'm leaning towards building the 701 now. *Maybe with a 582 or
if finances allow, a 912.

Wil-

For a while I thought more HP would be better for the 701, 100 instead
of 80.

After reading a detailed pilot report of it with 100, I've decided 80
is fine. I'm going for a VW, 2149 cc. Nitrided crank. "Geared down"
with one of Great Plain's pulleys. More thrust, power 80 to 100

What are the goods and the bads of having it 80hp and 100 hp? Are you
going for the folding wing option?

Wil

"William Hung" wrote

C'on Jim, it's not so ugly. Looks like a Jeep Willy of the sky to me,
and I think the Willy's jeeps look great. My plan is to one day get a
C150, I'm leaning towards building the 701 now. Maybe with a 582 or
if finances allow, a 912.

Yeah, I guess it isn't all that ugly; but it looks "bulldog ugly"; its
straight out top just has no streamlined look to it, I think.

Put a Jubaru 3300 on it, if you want to do it right. None of the sewing
machine Rotax engines, for me.
--
Jim in NC

"Morgans" wrote in news:Pxsnj.56$zV2.27
@newsfe06.lga:


"William Hung" wrote

C'on Jim, it's not so ugly. Looks like a Jeep Willy of the sky to me,
and I think the Willy's jeeps look great. My plan is to one day get a
C150, I'm leaning towards building the 701 now. Maybe with a 582 or
if finances allow, a 912.

Yeah, I guess it isn't all that ugly; but it looks "bulldog ugly"; its
straight out top just has no streamlined look to it, I think.

Put a Jubaru 3300 on it, if you want to do it right. None of the sewing
machine Rotax engines, for me.

In fact, I've heard the opposite, that the Jabirus seldom make it past 500
hours and often a lot less before needing a rebuild..

Bertie

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote

In fact, I've heard the opposite, that the Jabirus seldom make it past 500
hours and often a lot less before needing a rebuild..

Yeah, I've heard that is about right for the early ones.

The scuttlebutt is that they learned some lessons, and redesigned some
things, and that their power and reliability is now much, much improved.
--
Jim in NC

On Jan 28, 4:56*pm, "Morgans" wrote:
"William Hung" wrote

C'on Jim, it's not so ugly. *Looks like a Jeep Willy of the sky to me,
and I think the Willy's jeeps look great. *My plan is to one day get a
C150, I'm leaning towards building the 701 now. *Maybe with a 582 or
if finances allow, a 912.

Yeah, I guess it isn't all that ugly; but it looks "bulldog ugly"; its
straight out top just has no streamlined look to it, I think.

Put a Jubaru 3300 on it, if you want to do it right. *None of the sewing
machine Rotax engines, for me.
--
Jim in NC

Why the Jabiru Jim?

WIl