best engine for distance and speed?

[bubbrubb21]

I think having a cross country cruise speed that gets you places reasonably while still having STOL capabilities to go in and out of short strips, haul a reasonable load, be relatively inexpensive to own and operate, and yet be able to be a good ski plane, a float plane, a tri gear or a taildragger, or a fun sport aerobatic plane with wings that fold for storage is a pretty large list of capabilities. I'm not sure there are any other designs that can claim all that.

But I agree, if speed is the major goal a Kitfox is not the airplane. I like the balance of all things listed above. Otherwise I'd be flying a Glasair 3 with 350 hp and twin turbo's to get me where I need to go.

But that wouldn't be half the fun as getting there in the Kitfox

Speed isn;t the be all end-all. I would be using the plane to get to remote locations and I want to have fun doing it. A Cessna 182 doesn;t scream fun to me. I want a stick, not a yoke. I want to be able to put the side windows down, hand out the window, smell the fresh air, etc etc. I;m in a hurry, but not in a hurry. The alternative is that I drive 5-10hrs every cpl days. Told my boss I'd rather just get my pilot's license (something I've wanted to do ever since I grew up under the flight path in Vancouver, BC)

I just want to know the best outfit possible on a Kitfox

[aviator79]

Getting 700 miles in hurry is more RV than Kitfox territory.

In my opinion, you need to pick a plane for your "80% mission". If most of your flying is 700 mile cross countries to get somewhere you have to be for business, I think you'd quickly regret a Kitfox. Keep in mind that in addition to getting you there faster, speed gives you more options for avoiding weather, and the faster airplanes tend to have higher wing loading, making them more stable and comfortable on longer trips.

[aviator79]

Speed isn;t the be all end-all. I would be using the plane to get to remote locations and I want to have fun doing it. A Cessna 182 doesn;t scream fun to me. I want a stick, not a yoke. I want to be able to put the side windows down, hand out the window, smell the fresh air, etc etc. I;m in a hurry, but not in a hurry. The alternative is that I drive 5-10hrs every cpl days. Told my boss I'd rather just get my pilot's license (something I've wanted to do ever since I grew up under the flight path in Vancouver, BC)

I just want to know the best outfit possible on a Kitfox

Now if THAT is your 80% mission, the Kitfox is perfect for you, and I would bet a 912iS with CS or IFA prop is your best engine bet.

[bubbrubb21]

Getting 700 miles in hurry is more RV than Kitfox territory.

In my opinion, you need to pick a plane for your "80% mission". If most of your flying is 700 mile cross countries to get somewhere you have to be for business, I think you'd quickly regret a Kitfox. Keep in mind that in addition to getting you there faster, speed gives you more options for avoiding weather, and the faster airplanes tend to have higher wing loading, making them more stable and comfortable on longer trips.

700mi+ would be the rare trip, 80% would be 300-400mi round trip max

[Av8r3400]

A Kitfox is a fun flying, recreational airplane. This is the mission of this design and it excels at it. It is not designed or intended to be a commuter or business flying machine.

Yes, it can be done, but IMO it will not fit that mission very well. IFR flying in this plane (mandatory for business commuting), while possible, would be highly unadvisable. It would be beyond exhausting and not safe for any extended periods of time compared to a heavier plane designed for that mission.

This conversation has been had millions of times since 1903. "I'll get my license and a plane, then fly to work rather than drive." I'm sorry to be the nay-sayer, but this is not realistic.

If you are looking for a plane to fly recreationally and have fun with, the Kitfox is your plane. It's an amazing flying awesome little fun plane.

[bubbrubb21]

A Kitfox is a fun flying, recreational airplane. This is the mission of this design and it excels at it. It is not designed or intended to be a commuter or business flying machine.

Yes, it can be done, but IMO it will not fit that mission very well. IFR flying in this plane (mandatory for business commuting), while possible, would be highly unadvisable. It would be beyond exhausting and not safe for any extended periods of time compared to a heavier plane designed for that mission.

This conversation has been had millions of times since 1903. "I'll get my license and a plane, then fly to work rather than drive." I'm sorry to be the nay-sayer, but this is not realistic.

If you are looking for a plane to fly recreationally and have fun with, the Kitfox is your plane. It's an amazing flying awesome little fun plane.

its not for business in corporate sense. I;d be living in Southern Brazil and need to get to remote areas out in the country. I plan to livee in a city called Florianopolis on the coast. Much rather fly then drive 5hrs, 10hrs, 15hrs, etc. Not mandatory I fly but it would be good for business (time/money/etc). I would categorize it as me flying recreationally, and upon landing, doing business in ripped jeans and t-shirt, then flying back recreationally

[t j]

Time to spare, go by air. More time yet, take a jet.

[bubbrubb21]

Time to spare, go by air. More time yet, take a jet.

L39 Albatross will be post-taildragger