Kitfox Aircraft Stick and Rudder Stein Air Grove Aircraft TCW Technologies Dynon Avionics AeroLED MGL Avionics Leading Edge Airfoils Desser EarthX Batteries Garmin G3X Touch
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 41 to 49 of 49

Thread: PROs and CONs of Engine Choices

  1. #41
    Senior Member jrevens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Arvada, CO
    Posts
    2,146

    Default Re: PROs and CONs of Engine Choices

    IMHO, a Kitfox is just not going to be a real efficient airplane as far as mpg goes, because it's never going to be a slick, fast airplane no matter how much horsepower you have. I shines in other ways that are important to most of us.


    As an example of the mpg thing, I flew a cross country trip up to Idaho with my friend Stan. He flew his 80 hp Mod. IV Speedster, and I my 160 hp Thorp. While not going as fast as I could have, I averaged 180 mph and obviously reached our planned stops well before he did, where I waited and re-fueled along with him. I burned considerably less fuel at each stop. My mpg was close to 30. He could have burned cheaper fuel than I, if it had been available.
    John Evens
    Arvada, CO
    Kitfox SS7 N27JE
    EAA Lifetime
    Chap. 43 honorary Lifetime

  2. #42
    Senior Member aviator79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Los Alamos, NM
    Posts
    913

    Default Re: PROs and CONs of Engine Choices

    In the same spirit of friendly ribbing, the factory liked that 340 so much that they replaced it with a turbochrged Rotax.

    I kid as well; they use those planes as test mules. Removing the 340 is not an indictment of its performance. How many engines has 12KF had? Nonetheless, I don't think anyone would say the performance from the current powerplant on the STI is Prius-like.

    jmodguy, your plane will be a beast, and a pretty one at that. What's great about building your own plane is that you get a plane that is really your own.
    --Brian
    Flying - S7SS

  3. #43
    Senior Member aviator79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Los Alamos, NM
    Posts
    913

    Default Re: PROs and CONs of Engine Choices

    Now that I think of it, because the STi has had both the 340 and a turbo Rotax, asking John or Brandon to give you an honest comparison might not be a bad idea. It's not quite apples-to-apples because the 915 has a bit more punch, an intercooler, and EFI. And then there's the price tag... Still, you can eliminate a lot of variables by holding the pilot and the rest of the airplane constant.
    --Brian
    Flying - S7SS

  4. #44

    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    seattle, wa
    Posts
    22

    Default Re: PROs and CONs of Engine Choices

    With product cycle times and development costs I would guess Rotax and a few of the kit providers are making bets on possible FAA rule changes which would impact the release of a 915 without CV prop oil. As an in-flight adjustable prop is needed to take full advantage of the 915 Rotax may just consider the market too small to target especially as this isn't an issue in Europe.

    Disclaimer that I have zero insider information and that my statements here are pure guesses and most likely wrong.

    I would guess that as part of LAMA's request for early testing of the single lever adjustable props and other requests are related.

    If you look at the factory STi with the 915 it does seem to be single lever control and is probably the system in the below presentation from RS Aerotech.

    https://youtu.be/y7xU_2Zzbb0?t=300

    As John has stated that there has been a shift to people wanting to buy S-LSA airplanes and a relative decline of people building kits. So being ready for potential rule changes and being able to have data to justify those changes is probably of value to them.

    The RS Aerotech's presentation on a single lever solution requires a FADEC engine and you can see some info here although public info is fairly sparse. Look at the display on this sheet then look at the LCD in front of the right seat on the factory STi. Note that they are also using the same MT prop from this presentation too.

    http://www.rsaerotech.com/tl_files/d...esentation.pdf

    Under the S-LSA rules the x340 weight puts is very close to the limits without going E-AB and I would bet being able to support LAMAs request and the offer for early access to a new sexy prototype engine justified swapping them out. Especially compared to the time and cost of pulling a new airplane from a production line with a waiting list. The x340 is not full FADEC or even EFI how kitfox sells them and I don't know if anyone is testing a single lever solution for that engine yet but it would add weight.

    Reminder this is all purely a guess on my part.


    Edit to add tread from earlier this year that talks about this.

    http://www.teamkitfox.com/Forums/showthread.php?p=71114
    Last edited by nyrikki; 09-19-2018 at 04:06 PM.

  5. #45
    Senior Member jmodguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Carmel, IN
    Posts
    744

    Default Re: PROs and CONs of Engine Choices

    A quick look at the rsaerotech system gave me this...
    $35k for the engine, prob closer to 40k installed, @$10-12k for prop, can’t seem to find EMU pricing but let’s say $1.5k. Don’t forget the 6year CS prop overhaul cost (@ $2k min for an MT). Maybe they offer a package discount? Anyone want to go to a Nassau to check them out??
    With the added complexities don’t forget to consider failure modes and the cost of troubleshooting/repairing this system. Look at all the threads on troubleshooting basic 912 engines on this forum. This system may be simple to operate, but it will be costly to maintain and IMO cost prohibitive to install at $50k+.
    Jeff
    KF 5
    340KF

  6. #46
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    wales,ny
    Posts
    710

    Default Re: PROs and CONs of Engine Choices

    Amen Brother, its all fun and games until you gotta fix something-in my simple mind simpler is better. I have an IO-240 up front of my Series 5 . So far 15 years and 850 hrs later its been bullet proof . No regrets here , but thats the beauty of a homebuilt, you build it the way YOU want it , to meet what YOU think an airplane should look like.Bruce N199CL

  7. #47

    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    seattle, wa
    Posts
    22

    Default Re: PROs and CONs of Engine Choices

    I should clarify that I was referencing guessing on Rotax and other S-LSA industry trends and motivations. The exponential pricing seems to indicate that they don't worry too much about the increased price and CV props are fairly popular in Europe where the rules are different.

    My budget is below S-LSA prices but sufficient enough to avoid hand propping J3/7AC. I won't go with a 915+CV but I doubt the LSA rules will ever allow for a three lever config. "pilot's improper use of the mixture control" is pretty common on crash reports. So I doubt that adding a 3rd lever will happen for S-LSA. Note that is a guess and not based on any knowledge.

    I don't own a car without a clutch pedal and haven't for decades so I get the sentiment about simplicity.

    While I have no experience with CV props and can't even comment on that topic. On the subject of the rotax ignition. A shift in complexity can actually lead to less complexity for the system as a whole.

    While my opinion won't be true for everyone. IMHO it would be easier for me to troubleshoot the 912/15iS than the 912ul(s) Ducati "Dual Capacitor Discharge Ignition". Despite being "electronic" it is not digital and while it may have a lower part count it is not necessarily simpler.

    The magneto generator stator assembly is complex and the e-boxes are hard to test and the shared nature of components makes things challenging IMHO. Like a typical CDI system it is mostly passive components which sounds simpler until you have multiple functions on one stator and two potted black boxes without enough connectivity to fully test the thyristor circuit.



    While the value obviously needs to be evaluated by each user the increase number in sensors on a computer controlled system can be easier to test in isolation.

    With simple dual coil packs and hall effect crank sensors I wouldn't even need a schematic to troubleshoot the major components on a 912is/915is. Which is a good thing because I don't think Rotax has release a schematic but that is partly because they don't have to.

    Obviously this is dependent on a builders preferences, budget, and experience. Personally I would find the shift in complexity of a computer controlled ignition to actually result in a lower overall complexity compared to the 912ul(s) dual Ducati DCDI system.

    I wouldn't back away from a newer flyEFii or SDS system on a traditional aero engine but people will want to understand fuel maps etc...which does pose an additional barrier.

    Your mileage may vary.

    It is really cool to have the ability to build it the way YOU want.

  8. #48

    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    89

    Default Re: PROs and CONs of Engine Choices

    For me, when I get to it, the 912is will most likely be the one I choose. I live in Utah, so already I am high elevation. I would LOVE to put on the 915is, but 38k for just an engine YIKES!. My entire brand new 2016 Tacoma cost under that!

  9. #49

    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    seattle, wa
    Posts
    22

    Default Re: PROs and CONs of Engine Choices

    As to not include others in what probably edges on paranoia on my part I should point out that people do fine with the 914 and even the lower power 912ul or even the two strokes in Wyoming and Colorado.

    I had a bad experience coming back west bound across the divide South of Lander a few decades back J-3 (pre-gps days). With the typical Westerlies it is not uncommon for there to be a sink on the leeward side and there is a gradual rise that can be very deceptive especially in the winter with flat lighting or fresh snow.

    This has lead to several crashes in the area but a kitfox should do better than that old J-3. The slight increase in power at altitude from the iS plus Bing carbs tending to the rich side is a concern for me. Note this is a extremely conservative stance. The J-3 didn't even have a mixture control or the altitude compensation and had less HP to start with so...

    I lost the link to the great web page that graphed historical DA. The concerns about the 8000' critical altitude for takeoff power on the 914 was the inability for official sources to describe how power fell off . If you watch the DA for EVW you will see that it cycles between 7200' and 10,000' daily for most of the year.

    If you are down in the valley in Utah at a ~4,200 elevation this is less of a concern and the performance benefits may be worth it for you if cost is not a barrier.

    My grandfather built a glider in the 1930's and had no problem flying it at 8000' despite the fact that he launched with his brother towing it with a motorcycle and even 45HP would be a stretch. So I chose to error on the side of known values and constancy.

    None of these limitations I mentioned would pose a problem if someone simply knew their aircraft. It is simply past my personal comfort levels because I want to do the math.

    I am only offering my opinions because this is a hard decision and most threads tend to be focused on single choices. Hopefully my posts help others evaluate their options but please temper them with with the above personal limitations and conditions. I am in no way an authority or subject matter expert.

    If my home airport below 5000' I would personally consider the risk vs. exposure time to be small and less critical than other factors.

    A 915 or x340 and potentially Vx being primarily limited by pilot comfort would be pretty cool though.

    It would be nice if people circle back an update what personal choices or assumptions they would have changed after they have some flight time. I'll try to remember to point out my mistakes were.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •