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

V-8 powered Seabee



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old October 22nd 03, 05:33 AM
Ron Wanttaja
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 14:47:32 GMT, David Hill
wrote:

The project I'm working on (1924 Epps Light Monoplane replica) motivated
me to learn about modern motorcycle engines. The original engine in the
original plane was an Indian Chief motorcycle engine. From photos it
looked like he initially had it set up as a direct drive, then
subsequently built a chain drive PSRU.

At some point before the plane was sold, it was converted to a Lawrance
A-3 engine. I've heard two stories about why he changed the engine.
One is that he wanted more power (28 hp for the Lawrance vs. 17 hp for
the Indian). The other story is that he got tired of the chain breaking.


Hey, cool. But forget those period motorcycle engines. Use a nice
reliable aircraft engine, like a Szekely. :-)

(For those who don't get it: The Szekely 3-cylinder radial has an AD note
calling for a cable running around the outside of the cylinders. To
prevent the parts from flying too far away when they break....)


One interesting motor I found is the Honda series of V-4 engines.
Though they have only one plug per cylinder, they have dual spark boxes.
Some riders I know have lost half their ignition system and had a hard
time telling something was wrong; they just seemed to be down a bit on
power, even though they were running on only two cylinders out of four.


My 1984 Nissan pickup has a straight four with two plugs per cylinder. As
I recall, it has two coils but fires all the plugs via one distributor.

Ron Wanttaja

Ads
  #22  
Old October 22nd 03, 05:38 AM
Jerry Springer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I had a VW powered aircraft one time that I had over 500 hours on.
In that 500 hours I had two complete failures. One I was close
enough to land on an airport, the other one did not turn out so well.
Point is that saying how many hours an engine has on it does not tell
the whole story, we need to know the maintenance history along with
the the hours flown.

Jerry

Robert Schieck wrote:
John Stricker wrote:

Corky,


Somewhere it was said they have 600 hours on this conversion and yet from
their site "I have approximately 56 hours on the finished product,
including
a very enjoyable trip to Airventure 2000." Not a long term study.


He has more than 600 hours on the first SeaBee that was converted and
56 hours on the second one ......

I leave the rest of the error to be corrected by the reader...

Rob

.ps I have seen this aircraft 3 times as he comes to the RAA events to
talk about the plane.



  #23  
Old October 22nd 03, 06:32 AM
James Lloyd
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I am not recomending this but my 95 ford ranger has a 4 cyl.eng. with
dual elect. ign. that is fully redundant in case smeone wants to copy
it.One coil fires one set of plugs and the other,the other.Jim

  #24  
Old October 22nd 03, 06:49 AM
Barnyard BOb --
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Jerry Springer wrote:

I had a VW powered aircraft one time that I had over 500 hours on.
In that 500 hours I had two complete failures. One I was close
enough to land on an airport, the other one did not turn out so well.
Point is that saying how many hours an engine has on it does not tell
the whole story, we need to know the maintenance history along with
the the hours flown.

Jerry

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Jerry,
You're beating a very, very dead horse.

The RAH auto conversion wannabees are incurably gullible
and will not be deterred by honest info, perspective or reality.

Legitimate auto conversion guys are knee deep in alligators...
walking their talk and have no time for the fuzzy and inane
horse**** that drives the RAH noisemakers. The RAH group
is nothing but a vocal minority that fraudulently passes itself
off as the real deal. It's laughable. All hat and no cattle,
comes to mind. Time and time again this proves the case.
The best they do is present URL's of someone elses claim to fame.

It's entertaining to observe a bunch of clueless, immature twits
do what they do best... hoot, holler, name call and shoot
themselves in the foot at every turn.... with absolutely
no awareness to that very fact.


Barnyard BOb -- once again predictable
  #25  
Old October 22nd 03, 08:01 AM
Bart D. Hull
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Bob wrote:


Jerry,
You're beating a very, very dead horse.

The RAH anti-auto conversion wannabees are incurable
and will not be deterred by honest info, perspective or reality.

I don't like debating with legitimate auto conversion guys
as I don't know what the **** I'm talking about. The RAH group
is nothing but a vocal minority that fraudulently passes itself
off as the real deal. It's laughable. All hat and no cattle,
comes to mind. Time and time again this proves the case.
The best they do is present URL's of someone elses claim to fame.

It's entertaining to observe a bunch of clueless, old twits
like myself, do what I do best... hoot, holler, name call and shoot
themselves in the foot at every turn.... with absolutely
no awareness to that very fact.


Barnyard BOb -- once again predictable



Thought I'd do a "truth in advertising" re-write of Bob's prose.

;-)
--
Bart D. Hull

Tempe, Arizona

Check
http://www.inficad.com/~bdhull/engine.html
for my Subaru Engine Conversion
Check http://www.inficad.com/~bdhull/fuselage.html
for Tango II I'm building.

  #26  
Old October 22nd 03, 01:15 PM
Corky Scott
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 21:26:48 -0500, "John Stricker"
wrote:

I found this web site to be interesting. The guy looks like he did a good
job on the conversion for his purposes. I also can't see one item on it
that makes any better than the Franklin. He has the overhaul cost at
$40,000. For a Franklin? Lot's of guys were working on the Franklin's in
Cozy's because they were 3-4 thousand CHEAPER than a 360 Lycoming.


The problem, as I understood it, was that parts for the model of
Franklin used in the Seabee could not be found anymore. Hence the
conversion.

You are asking the wrong person your questions, I just posted the link
so that people who are interested in auto conversion can have a look
at this one. If you really feel you need answers to your questions I
suggest you contact the guys who are flying the Seabee conversion.

Corky Scott



  #27  
Old October 22nd 03, 02:00 PM
Larry Smith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Barnyard BOb --" wrote in message
...

Jerry Springer wrote:

I had a VW powered aircraft one time that I had over 500 hours on.
In that 500 hours I had two complete failures. One I was close
enough to land on an airport, the other one did not turn out so well.
Point is that saying how many hours an engine has on it does not tell
the whole story, we need to know the maintenance history along with
the the hours flown.

Jerry

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Jerry,
You're beating a very, very dead horse.

The RAH auto conversion wannabees are incurably gullible
and will not be deterred by honest info, perspective or reality.

Legitimate auto conversion guys are knee deep in alligators...
walking their talk and have no time for the fuzzy and inane
horse**** that drives the RAH noisemakers. The RAH group
is nothing but a vocal minority that fraudulently passes itself
off as the real deal. It's laughable. All hat and no cattle,
comes to mind. Time and time again this proves the case.
The best they do is present URL's of someone elses claim to fame.

It's entertaining to observe a bunch of clueless, immature twits
do what they do best... hoot, holler, name call and shoot
themselves in the foot at every turn.... with absolutely
no awareness to that very fact.


Barnyard BOb -- once again predictable



  #28  
Old October 22nd 03, 02:07 PM
Model Flyer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Ron Wanttaja" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 14:47:32 GMT, David Hill
wrote:


the Indian). The other story is that he got tired of the chain

breaking.

Hey, cool. But forget those period motorcycle engines. Use a nice
reliable aircraft engine, like a Szekely. :-)

(For those who don't get it: The Szekely 3-cylinder radial has an

AD note
calling for a cable running around the outside of the cylinders.

To
prevent the parts from flying too far away when they break....)


Now that's really funny, same as the Bleriot crossing of the English
Channel, by the time he got half way his boots were burning as there
was no fire wall, he has the full heat from the engine to contend
with.:-)
--

..
--
Cheers,
Jonathan Lowe
whatever at antispam dot net
No email address given because of spam.
Antispam trap in place





One interesting motor I found is the Honda series of V-4 engines.
Though they have only one plug per cylinder, they have dual spark

boxes.
Some riders I know have lost half their ignition system and had

a hard
time telling something was wrong; they just seemed to be down a

bit on
power, even though they were running on only two cylinders out of

four.

My 1984 Nissan pickup has a straight four with two plugs per

cylinder. As
I recall, it has two coils but fires all the plugs via one

distributor.

Ron Wanttaja



  #30  
Old October 22nd 03, 03:08 PM
Robert Schieck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

John Stricker wrote:

Rob,

I found on a different page where he says he had 650+ hours on the LS6 now.
His two pages contradict each other, but that's understandable, things
happen.

My point on this is that if HE wants to experiment and play with it, that's
great. It might even be something I might want to try some time. But in
the long haul, figuring time, $$, and all factors, an auto conversion should
be looked at as just that, something to experiment and play with and not
something that's going to save you a ton of money.


As to "rest of the error.." your point is???




as you said:

Speaking of which..............

They really don't say much about those bells and whistles, do they?? All
they say is that the engine uses "multi-port injection" and "computerized
electronic 8 coils" ignition. Curious, that's what GM uses on them. Except
to make them really run right, in cruise, they have to operate in closed
loop mode. To do that, they need a lead free fuel. 100LL will make the O2
sensors last about, oh, 3-4 hours, if you're lucky. What happens if the O2
sensor fails? The ECM goes into open loop mode and you get BSFC of around
..500 or so.


from the web site:



Engine Control System

The system I chose is a standard G.M. system. The unit is programmed
with the export code for leaded fuel and uses no oxygen sensors. This
was to enable me to run 100 octane Low Lead fuel as well as premium
unleaded fuel. It also meets the KISS criteria. The emission and VAT
codes are suppressed. The computer is stock G.M. After much research and
correspondence, the wiring harness was purchased from an after market
supplier. This portion of the project was as time consuming as designing
the reduction drive. Before undertaking a project like this, it is
imperative to purchase the factory (not after market) manuals for the
engine and read them thoroughly. You have to decide what is acceptable
practice, how you want you're engine management system to work, and have
the harness manufactured accordingly.

I am not sure how much more detail you want or expected and the issue of the O2 sensor was addressed.


disappointed, time to go to private lists where signal to noise ratio is better.

Rob





 




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
human powered flight patrick timony Home Built 10 September 16th 03 03:38 AM
Illusive elastic powered Ornithopter Mike Hindle Home Built 6 September 15th 03 03:32 PM
Pre-Rotator Powered by Compressed Air? nuke Home Built 8 July 30th 03 12:36 PM
Powered Parachute Plans MJC Home Built 4 July 15th 03 07:29 PM
Powered Parachute Plans- correction Cy Galley Home Built 0 July 11th 03 03:43 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:48 PM.


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