VWs

wrote:
On Jan 29, 3:39 pm, wrote:
For everyone else, as I said at the out-set this isn't a new topic.
Dig around, you'll find lots of valuable, quantified information here
and in the archives of the AirVW Group. You will also find lots of
-R.S.Hoover
I'm not finding a way into AirVW group on yahoo. Members only -- and
no way to become a member!

Guess Yahoo doesn't want to maintain it.

Nevermind I found it. There's a dash in there.

AirVW and Air-VW are not the same group and I expect the consensus point
of view is different.

Charles

On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 11:46:17 -0800 (PST),
wrote:


I'm building or should be building) a Hummel Bird, which
uses a half-VW conversion. What's your take on these things, seeing
that you have lots of VW experience? My experience with VWs is limited
to my first car, a '62 Beetle that I spent lots of time fixing, and a
friend's '59 van. Ditto. Scott Casler claims 37 HP from a 1037 CC two-
banger. Sounds high.
For those interested, here's the website: http://www.hummelengines.com/
Click on the "Hummer 2 Cylinder VW"

Dan
Mabee 20 sustained and 35 peak. And I'm an optimist.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 19:57:34 GMT, Anthony W
wrote:

wrote:

To understand why the VW head does so poorly simply compare it to the
early 1500cc (85hp) Porsche heads. Then compare those to the Corvair.

-R.S.Hoover

Out of curiosity what is your opinion of the Corvair engine?

Tony
The corvair has more fin area than an O200.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

wrote

Why are you being such an aggressive prick?

Can't you help yourself?

Seems like you shot the first volley across the bow.

Like saying this: "When I want to know what *you* think is a legitimate
pursuit in the experimental aircraft arena I'll ask."
--
Jim in NC

wrote:

Isn't that what you did? If not, why post the results of your mental
masturbation here?


Why are you being such an aggressive prick?

Can't you help yourself?


I think that's the question everybody here is asking about you.

On Jan 29, 6:29 pm, cavalamb himself wrote:
wrote:
Luckily for me RS Hoover has taken the time to actually be helpful. He
sounds like he's been building VWs and messing with them in airplanes
for many years. It looks like Dale Alexander has had a lot of
experience with VWs too. I can't tell yet who else responding to this
thread actually has built or used VWs in airplanes. Those are the
people I'm interested in hearing from and whose opinions I'd like to
hear.

VeeDubber is an excellent writer - and I believe he IS building a plane.

But I don't think he has yet finished and flown one.

(Correct me if I'm wrong on that Robert?)

Does "cavelamb himself" have any experience building VWs? Flown them

in aircraft? I don't know. I can't tell.

I have - several.

And helped on others.

But from tone alone, I doubt you are willing to listen.

Richard

Careful, lest we end up juandering in the forest..

Craig

Seems like you shot the first volley across the bow.

Like saying this: "When I want to know what *you* think is a legitimate
pursuit in the experimental aircraft arena I'll ask."
--
Jim in NC

I thought this was the first "shot"

"You would have to replace the jug and head to match the aero design.
And
then why? So that you could mate you're new heads to a cylinder block
that has been known to crack just sitting on a shelf waiting to be
installed?"

I didn't think that was offered in the spirit of answering an honest
question, but to be aggressive and insulting.

I have - several.

And helped on others.

But from tone alone, I doubt you are willing to listen.

Richard

I might have gotten mad earlier but I am honestly interested.

Some people get a kick out of confrontation on web boards but I don't.

I would be interested in knowing about those engines you have built
and helped build. I would be interested in knowing how many hours of
operation was typical before having to open up them up again. What
kind of planes were they flown in? Were owners pleased with them or
wind up wishing they'd done something else? Did they buy one of the
kits from a company like GP or build it themselves? Direct Drive?
PSRU?

What were the problems?

These are questions you'd like to see in a book like William Wynne's
Corvair Conversion Manual but is there one of that quality for VWs? I
don't know.

On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:32:19 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

Seems like you shot the first volley across the bow.

Like saying this: "When I want to know what *you* think is a legitimate
pursuit in the experimental aircraft arena I'll ask."
--
Jim in NC

I thought this was the first "shot"

"You would have to replace the jug and head to match the aero design.
And
then why? So that you could mate you're new heads to a cylinder block
that has been known to crack just sitting on a shelf waiting to be
installed?"

I didn't think that was offered in the spirit of answering an honest
question, but to be aggressive and insulting.

I don't see what's insulting about the truth - I didn't see ANY
personal attack.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Jan 29, 11:46 am, wrote:
half-VW conversion. What's your take on these things,

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Generally poor.

If I wanted a two-cylinder air cooled engine I'd go buy one, following
the lead of Leeon Davis.

If someone held a gun to my head and forced me to build a two-banger
using VW components, I'd do what Leonard Milholland has done.

But a cut-case half-VW doesn't make a lot of sense for several
reasons, most based on hard-ball engineering. For example, we've been
aware of the thermal limitations and lubrication problems of the VW
since the late 1950's and it would seem logical that if you're going
to modify the engine as extensively as is done with the typical half-
VW you would use that opportunity to increase the fin area of the
heads and provide for full-time top-end lubrication. But the guys
selling half-VW conversion plans didn't do that. Nor did they use
that opportunity to install a solid-state two-cylinder ignition
module, such as the Briggs & Stratton unit used on the AeroVee.

But the main reason for my generally poor opinion of two-bangers has
to do with how they FLY . Or rather, how they run. None of the
horizontally opposed two cylinder engines I've flown behind (3 of
them; Long, Wright-Moorehouse, and Aeronca) were very smooth and the
Aeronca was the only one you could call well engineered (Leslie Long's
engine was home-made using Harley-Davidson jugs).

Finally, given the alternatives, I can't see how anyone can justify
the cost of these converesions. To me, it simply doesn't make sense.

-R.S.Hoover