A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Home Built
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Rotax vs. Jabiru



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 4th 06, 11:52 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rotax vs. Jabiru


As I continue to research, the Zodiac XL and the Sonex are on the short
list. Both offer a couple of engine options including Rotax 912
(variations) and the Jabiru 3300. Real-world performance doesn't seem
like it would be that much different, at least on paper.

I hope this isn't a religious issue. I'm interested in opinions on both
the Rotax and Jabiru options.

TIA.


Ads
  #2  
Old January 4th 06, 11:58 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rotax vs. Jabiru



Cal Vanize wrote:


As I continue to research, the Zodiac XL and the Sonex are on the short
list. Both offer a couple of engine options including Rotax 912
(variations) and the Jabiru 3300. Real-world performance doesn't seem
like it would be that much different, at least on paper.

I hope this isn't a religious issue. I'm interested in opinions on both
the Rotax and Jabiru options.

TIA.



Or if I opt for a Zodiac XL, would it be better to use a Conti O-200?


  #3  
Old January 5th 06, 03:02 AM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rotax vs. Jabiru


"Cal Vanize" wrote

Or if I opt for a Zodiac XL, would it be better to use a Conti O-200?



I think it pushes it above the weight for LSA designation. Check on that.
--
Jim in NC


  #4  
Old January 5th 06, 03:05 AM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rotax vs. Jabiru


"Cal Vanize" wrote

I hope this isn't a religious issue. I'm interested in opinions on both
the Rotax and Jabiru options.


More people are badmouthing Jubiru, than are badmouthing the Rotax 4
strokes.

YMMV.
--
Jim in NC


  #5  
Old January 5th 06, 04:40 AM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rotax vs. Jabiru

I've only got 120 trouble free hours on my 912ULS, so I'm no first hand
expert, but, the 912 was recently changed from TBO of 1200 hours to
1500. That seems like a fairly good endorsement for reasonablely good
field experience.
tom

  #7  
Old January 5th 06, 02:13 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rotax vs. Jabiru

Cal Vanize wrote in
:


As I continue to research, the Zodiac XL and the Sonex are on the
short list. Both offer a couple of engine options including Rotax 912
(variations) and the Jabiru 3300. Real-world performance doesn't seem
like it would be that much different, at least on paper.

I hope this isn't a religious issue. I'm interested in opinions on
both the Rotax and Jabiru options.

TIA.



Sonex does not offer support or FWF for the Rotex,... Just the Jabiru
(120 or 80hp) or Sonex' own "AeroVee" 80HP Volkswagan-based engine.
There are also several flying with GP VW conversions, and a couple with
a corvair (over the recomended FWF wieght though)

Both the Sonex and Zodiac are terrific planes with simular construction
methods. The Sonex is smaller both outside and in the cockpit, but
faster. The Sonex is at LEAST as fast as the factory claims (cruise
about 140-150 on 80hp, and 150-165 w/ jab 3300 (mph) yes they both meet
LSA limits since "max continuous power @ sea level is still under 138))
the Zodiac has never lived up to the factory speed claims (just ask or
read history on the Matronics list for confirmation). That doesn't make
the 601xl a bad plane, far from it... Just something else to throw into
the mix while considering.

If you havent already, join the yahoo SonexTalk list (
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sonextalk/ ) and the Zodiac list on
Matronics (http://www.matronics.com/Navigator/?Zenith-List).

I chose the Sonex, mostly because of speed and the fact that I am
building from scratch, and the full size planse from Sonex are much more
detailed & sutable for scratch building. If I was building from a kit,
I might still be scratching my head....






--
-- ET :-)

"A common mistake people make when trying to design something
completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete
fools."---- Douglas Adams
  #8  
Old January 5th 06, 03:29 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rotax vs. Jabiru

Morgans wrote:


"Cal Vanize" wrote

Or if I opt for a Zodiac XL, would it be better to use a Conti O-200?



I think it pushes it above the weight for LSA designation. Check on that.

Jim
I'm not sure if your talking about the 'built' version or E/AB version.
If it's the experimental version you can set the gross weight where you
like. Just limit it to the LSA requirement and your good to go. You will
lose some useful load which you can trade off with smaller tanks and less
range if you need the weight.
John

  #9  
Old January 5th 06, 05:16 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rotax vs. Jabiru

("UltraJohn" wrote)
I'm not sure if your talking about the 'built' version or E/AB version.
If it's the experimental version you can set the gross weight where you
like. Just limit it to the LSA requirement and your good to go. You will
lose some useful load which you can trade off with smaller tanks and less
range if you need the weight.



Could you ex"pound" on this - set the gross weight where you like?

Thanks


Mont ....blue, yeah, that's it - Montblue
  #10  
Old January 5th 06, 05:44 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rotax vs. Jabiru

"Montblack" wrote in
:

("UltraJohn" wrote)
I'm not sure if your talking about the 'built' version or E/AB
version. If it's the experimental version you can set the gross
weight where you like. Just limit it to the LSA requirement and your
good to go. You will lose some useful load which you can trade off
with smaller tanks and less range if you need the weight.



Could you ex"pound" on this - set the gross weight where you like?

Thanks


Mont ....blue, yeah, that's it - Montblue



As the builder/manufacturer of an ambuilt-experimental you can
absolutely set the max gross weight anywhere you like... Who is to tell
you that a kit that others have built and set at, say 1450lbs is
mandatory for you to do the same.... Of course, a ramp check when you
and your 200lb friend climb out and pull out pull out 200Lbs of camping
gear that's 150lbs over your gross weight will be a problem....

S-LSA and kit E-LSA are regulated as to the min usefull load to combat
just this issue... but ambuilt expermimental is not.
--
-- ET :-)

"A common mistake people make when trying to design something
completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete
fools."---- Douglas Adams
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Engine sound of Rotax 912 JK Home Built 12 May 22nd 05 02:47 PM
ROTAX 275 questions Eric Greenwell Soaring 0 January 6th 05 02:43 AM
Jabiru and Rotax engines Marco Rispoli Home Built 14 July 16th 04 07:23 AM
RV-9A's wing with Rotax 914? Shin Gou Home Built 26 March 7th 04 08:56 PM
Jabiru V Rotax reliability? Joe Home Built 11 September 5th 03 11:09 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.