Re: Landing gear choices...
Grove gear demo yesterday on a very rough surface in central Washington. Cow and wild horse trampled mud dried solid with occasional frost heaved rocks. I won't be landing there anymore! The tires are Desser 850s.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOaeNlyjeSs
Re: Landing gear choices...
So has anyone figured out the weight difference between the grove and the Cabana gear?
Re: Landing gear choices...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Floog
Grove gear demo yesterday on a very rough surface in central Washington. Cow and wild horse trampled mud dried solid with occasional frost heaved rocks. I won't be landing there anymore! The tires are Desser 850s.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOaeNlyjeSs
Video doesn't show up. Says it's unavailable. JImChuk
Re: Landing gear choices...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
redbowen
So has anyone figured out the weight difference between the grove and the Cabana gear?
Or, the cruise speed difference?
Re: Landing gear choices...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
littlecricket
Or, the cruise speed difference?
Following up:
Asking around, the factory says 3-5mph, Trent Palmer in one of his videos says 10mph, and talking to one another owner says 6-9 mph.
Re: Landing gear choices...
Cabane and bush gear are the same gear, right?
Re: Landing gear choices...
I agree that the Grove aluminum spring gear is tough and works well on our planes.
But, I feel a need to defend the 4130 steel tube cabane style gear;
- The cabane style steel tube gear has been used very successfully on many, many Super Cubs, Huskies, Maules etc, for decades in some of the most demanding environments of some of the most extreme places on our planet.
- I know it is a matter of preference, but I think the cabane gear is what looks right on the Kitfox airframe. Lets face it, the Kitfox looks more like an antique airplane than it does a more modern aircraft (like a Cessna). I think Trents' FreedomFox is a really good example of what I am talking about. In his early videos he had the aluminum spring gear. But now with the Kitfox STI cabane gear sitting nice and tall with the large bush tires that Model 5 is an especially impressive looking airplane. In my opinion, it looks "just right" with that STI cabane gear on it. Oh, and it obviously works as good as it looks.
- I have heard of a few Kitfoxes that buckled their cabane style gear in a very hard landing and/or crash. Most gears won't handle those situations. But if you knew you are probably going to be hard on a gear (or you just want some additional insurance), buy a cabane style gear that is purposely overbuilt for bush flying, like the STI or Shock Monster gear. It will be a lot sturdier than the original gear and therefore much more likely to handle heavier loads. And likely still lighter weight than the aluminum spring gear.
- I believe the cruise speed difference is not going to be significant if you make an effort to fair out the cabane gear, and put on similar sized tires as the plane with the spring gear. Granted, most people that want big tires and operate in the bush are more interested in operating in the rough more than speed, so seldom do people take the time to streamline a cabane gear. But if they would I think they'd be surprised how much speed they would get back. (as an example, I have a Highlander that had a standard cabane style gear that was open tube. I replaced that gear with a much taller, bigger cabane gear but covered it with fabric and gained nearly 10 mph in cruise over the non fabric covered gear).
Again, I know the aluminum spring gears work well. But so will the cabane style gear if you pick the right one.
But hey, these are experimental aircraft that we build, so choose the gear that is right for you...
Re: Landing gear choices...
jmodguy - for what it is worth, I ordered my kit with the cabane gear and that decision was based entirely on looks!! (Glad I didn't read this discussion before hand; too many good, technical or experiential points to be considered and my beer supply isn't sized for that.)
Re: Landing gear choices...
Grove gear sorta testimonial:
Two of us big people in a K-IV landing at Hemet here in SoCal. Pilot flared perfectly, about six to eight feet above the asphalt. I suggested adding a wee bit of power, but too late. Fortunately we dropped straight down and were tail low when the bottom dropped out. Yes we hit hard, but the Grove gear sucked it up, fortunately not so much as to make the prop hit, but enough to permanently bow the center section so the wheels were splayed about 6-10" and one leg was twisted about five degrees. As said before here, Robbie bent it back into shape and re-heat treated it; good as new.
That said, I never liked the softness of the Grove gear when noodling about on the ground. I like the gears that top out and make the lateral roll relatively rigid, typically the bungee or the cabane.
Re: Landing gear choices...
Quoted from Av8rPS post.
- The cabane style steel tube gear has been used very successfully on many, many Super Cubs, Huskies, Maules etc, for decades in some of the most demanding environments of some of the most extreme places on our planet.
Cub gear is of a different design than what has been marketed to the Avid/Kitfox group. It is made much heavier (for a heavier aircraft) and the geometry is different.
- I know it is a matter of preference, but I think the cabane gear is what looks right on the Kitfox airframe. Lets face it, the Kitfox looks more like an antique airplane than it does a more modern aircraft (like a Cessna). I think Trents' FreedomFox is a really good example of what I am talking about. In his early videos he had the aluminum spring gear. But now with the Kitfox STI cabane gear sitting nice and tall with the large bush tires that Model 5 is an especially impressive looking airplane. In my opinion, it looks "just right" with that STI cabane gear on it. Oh, and it obviously works as good as it looks.
No one can not argue with this.
- I have heard of a few Kitfoxes that buckled their cabane style gear in a very hard landing and/or crash. Most gears won't handle those situations. But if you knew you are probably going to be hard on a gear (or you just want some additional insurance), buy a cabane style gear that is purposely overbuilt for bush flying, like the STI or Shock Monster gear. It will be a lot sturdier than the original gear and therefore much more likely to handle heavier loads. And likely still lighter weight than the aluminum spring gear.
I can list at least four Avid/Kitfox aircraft that have been damaged by Cabine gear of various manufacturers. Some with landings that I would not classify anywhere near "hard". They all have one thing in common: Very heavy Die-Springs for suspension. This gear design should not be used as "bush" gear. It will damage your airplane in the rough and maybe even on a nice grass strip.
- I believe the cruise speed difference is not going to be significant ...
The little white Sputzy Avid/Kitfox in Merrill showed a significant loss of drag going from Cabine to Grove. His cruise speed increased 10+ mph. Faring of the cabine system would help, but it is difficult to do and no kits are available to install.
Again, I know the aluminum spring gears work well. But so will the cabane style gear if you pick the right one.
That is a very important point. Cabine gear can work very well if done correctly. Look at Trent Palmer's plane or the Factory STi demonstrator. These both have the very effective (and expensive) hydraulic dampers instead of springs. IMO the main problem with the design is the use of the heavy Die-Springs and the very limited travel to a hard bottoming stop. Larger tires will help alleviate this.