Looking to jump in feet first - but don't want to land on my arse

RR Urban wrote:
You might look into the O-360 Lycoming for this airplane too.
The XP-360 is a lotta bang for the buck.


If it were me (and it almost was), I'd do the O-320. You don't have
enough tanks on the -9 to properly feed a -360, and you don't need the
extra weight. Plus, the -9 has enough wing that you don't need a ton of
power to drag it into the air.

Ed Wischmeyer


Ed that is probably silliest thing I have ever seen you write.

Jerry

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

Why do you say this, Jerry?
I think Ed is on extremely safe and sane ground.

Next thing you know, someone is going to defend morphing
the RV-4 series into Harmon Rockets and its hotrod clones.

Van as a most successful designer could offer a version.
Anyone ever stop to think of all the *PRACTICAL* reasons
why he does not?


Barnyard BOb - over 50 years of successful flight

The -9 holds 36 gal of fuel. My 180hp RV-6 hold 37 gal of fuel
so don't tell me that there are not enough tanks on the -9 to feed
a O-360. There are two -9As close to me, one has an O-360 and the
other one has an IO-360 and they both are fantastic flying airplanes.
As far as him designing a hotrod it is just a matter of evolution,
kind of like when he built and was flying his RV-3 his thoughts were why
would anyone ever need a two place RV-. Then it was why would anyone ever want
a SBS seating arrangement. Then it was why would anyone need electric flaps.
Then why would anyone need a constant speed prop. I think you can start to get
the picture.

Jerry

richard riley wrote in message . ..
Of course Bob is correct. There are conical mount 235's, but they're
all pretty old now, and not many of them around.

Lycoming still builds the O-235 K and L series engines, and
they use the conical mounts. Our 1996 Citabria has an O-235K2C.

Dan