Thomas,
I assume you have the 100hp fitted.
It looks likely that I will buy an 80hp mono, then sell the engine (to a
microlight builder etc) buy a 100hp then convert it to tri gear as well.
I spoke to a couple of lads in microlighting that have changed their engines
to 912s. They will pay around 4k so I guess it will cost me another 4k to
upgrade it to 100hp, then the cost of the tri kit and labour!
Cheers
KevT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas Scherer" <europa81@web.de>
Subject: Re: 912 vs 912S
> 20 hp.
>
> I have converted my Classic Mono into a Trigear within 6 weeks of working
> part-time. The kit from the company is complete and goes in easy. It just
> hurts so bad to cut into a perfectly finished and painted skin and even
make
> layups on the outside (after sanding off your wet-look paint). The
> installation is rugged and well documented. Make sure you also install the
> speed kit for looks and performance afterwards.
>
> Weight penalty comes around 35 pounds - as you will not be able to remove
> all structure of the old tailwheel.
>
> I would not have crossed two oceans in a mono - too much fear of
crosswind.
> Yet still I fly into grass strips with the Tri - it uses however
> considerable more runway on take-off.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> <Thomas, N81EU>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kevin Taylor" <kevin@eastyorkshire.co.uk>
> Subject: 912 vs 912S
>
>
> Folks,
>
> In my quest to find a Europa I have noticed there are many more 80 hp
> variants for sale. Is there any comparison data on how much more take off
> run is required between the two. How much weight will be saved with the
> 80hp. I guess the 100hp is the favoured option but if a 80 hp has a vp
prop
> then how far off the performance of the 100hp will it be, and don't say
20hp
> please :-)
>
> Also has anyone converted a completed mono to a tri and roughly how much
> work is involved?
>
> All info, experiences and advice greatly appreciated
>
> Thanks
>
> Kevin
>
>
> ---
> Version: 6.0.362 / Virus Database: 199 - Release Date: 07/05/02
>
>
|