whats a wobbly prop?
<info@blackballclub.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Richard,
>
> The 912s is a good match for the Europa. With a well balanced prop and the
> tiniest bit of management, it runs nicely, and starts and stops without
> fuss. Unless you want to fly above 7000 feet a lot, why add the extra cost,
> weight, and complexity to a beautifull combination?
> A wobbly prop will add 20 pound weight, two or three thousand pounds cash,
> an extra log book etc., but will give you more performance than you will
> ever really need for a Mono with the average grass strip.
>
> Hope this helps. Cheers Bryan
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Richard Sementilli" <rsementi@gmail.com>
> To: <europa-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Europa-List: What engine for my Europa?
>
> >
> > So then, Karl, where can I find the information about how to make the
> > 912S run as smooth as a sewing machine?
> >
> > As a newcomer, I am still confused but overall, I have been getting
> > more positive feedback vs. negative feedback. Plus, I asked for
> > objective observations and actual experience with the 912S. I think
> > Terry is simply stating his experiences. Hopefully we'll all learn how
> > to get the engine to run smoother than he is experiencing.
> >
> > Does anyone out there have any suggestions or solutions to the rough
> > start/stop and idle of the 912 S?
> >
> > Thanks to all,
> > Richard
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Terry,
> > >
> > > Y ouseem to be badmouthing a perfectly good engine just because you have
> a problem with yours. Some builders have their 912 S running as smooth as a
> sewing machine. Mine could be smoother, but then I have not yet done a carb
> or propeller blade balance. Techniques for smooth startups and shutdowns
> were discussed in detail recently on this forum. I have no idea about high
> altitude performance, but one owner claims 914 equivalent performance up to
> 10,000 feet. The 914 is obviously a better performer at really high
> altitudes. It should also be kept in mind that early Europa builders did not
> have the choice of the S model.
> > >
> > > I have read all the engine discussions and it seems that each type has
> had reports ranging from awful to wonderful. How is a newcomer supposed to
> make up his mind ?
> > >
> > > Karl
> > >
> > > From: Terry Seaver terrys@cisco.com
> > > To: europa-list@matronics.com
> > > Subject: Re: Europa-List: What engine for my Europa?
> > > Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 09:53:15 -0800
> > >
> > > -- Europa-List message posted by: Terry Seaver terrys@cisco.com
>
>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi Richard,
> > >
> > > You didn't say where you do your flying.If you intend flying at
> > > altitude like we do around the Sierra Nevadas, you might consider the
> > > 914 the best bet.
> > > We have a mono-wheel XS with 912S and Airmaster prop.I would seriously
> > > consider installing the 914 or Jabiru over the 912S, given our
> > > experiences (we have over 400 hours on the plane/engine).
> > > Issues I have with the 912S are:
> > >
> > > 1) It shakes the whole plane when starting and stopping, causing great
> > > stress on any number of componants.Our exhaust system is in constant
> > > need of repair because of this.An ignition wire probably broke because
> > > of this.Standing outside the uncowled engine and watching the extreme
> > > travel of the shaken componants can be a real eye opener.It is not
> > > unusual to see +2G/0G on the panel mounted accelerometer following a
> > > start or stop. I would guess the 912S is worse than the 914 because of
> > > its higher compression.I would expect the Jabiru to be much smoother.
> > >
> > > 2) The 912S is a little anemic at high density altitudes.At 7,000+
> > > feet the plane has difficulty accelerating past 55 knots on take off
> > > until the gear/flaps are lifted a little.Climb rate at these altitudes
> > > can also be lower than I would like.
> > >
> > > 3) The mixture becomes rich at altitude, negating the fuel economy
> > > advantages of flying at altitude.The 914 is altitude compensating, and
> > > I assume the Jabiru has a mixture control (?).
> > >
> > > 4) Although the Rotax is claimed to have a TBO of 1000 hours or greater
> > > it is recommended that the gearbox be removed and sent in for check out
> > > every 300-400 hours.There have also been suggestions that idling the
> > > 912S down to 1400 rpm can cause damage to the gearbox due to rough
> > > idling.We idle our engine at about 1700-1800 rpm, which make the
> > > landings a little hotter with the additional idle thrust.
> > >
> > > just my two cents worth,
> > > regards,
> > > Terry Seaver
> > > A135 / N135TD
> > >
> > > Richard Sementilli wrote:
> > >
> > > -- Europa-List message posted by: Richard Sementilli rsementi@gmail.com
> > >
> > > I am down to 3 choices for an engine for my Europa.
> > > 1. Rotax 912S
> > > 2. Rotax 914
> > > 3. Jabiru 3300
> > >
> > > I would like to get objective opinions and actual experiences from
> > > anyone about the pro's and cons of each engine.
> > > My first choice is the 914 because of the all around performance but
> > > more than the huge price, I am worried about the complexity of the
> > > engine as it relates to maintenance and overall reliability. I have
> > > spoken to a few mechanics for Rotax but none of them have any
> > > experience with the 914 turbo. They all say to keep it simple and go
> > > with the 912 or the 3300. I agree but I'm willing to stretch that goal
> > > iffeel that I could handle the burden of its complexity.
>
>
> > >
> > >
> > > My most probable choice would be the 912S because it seems I can get
> > > great performance (the same or better than the Jabiru 3300) with
> > > relative ease of operation and mainenance, lighter weight, and
> > > comparable price to the Jabiru. I've even found a mechanic that is
> > > near (2 hours away) to my location. However, to the best of my
> > > research, it is still a more complicated engine and drive unit than
> > > the simple low reving Jabiru. It needs pump gas almost always, which
> > > may not be easy to come by during cross country flights.
> > > The Jabiru is the least expensive, most simple design, seems easier to
> > > maintain, and is direct drive. However, it's less proven, heavier and
> > > I can't find any repair facilities in the NY tristate area.
> > > Am I missing any other engine possibilities that could be even a better
> choice?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
|