Fred
I don't want to start a war or anything here. So I will qualify this by
saying THIS IS PURELY MY PERSONAL OPINION...having flown several
versions of Europa with all three rotax engines I chose the 914 turbo.
In the last 2yrs it has behaved perfectly and always had an excess of
power for almost any situation. I cannot rate it high enough. I do not
know of anyone who has fitted it having anything but praise for it. Now
that says it all to me. The guys who recommend other engines don't
usually have a 914 themselves so cannot really appreciate the brilliance
of this little engine. Fit the 914 you will be glad you did..!
Alan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Fred R.
Klein
Subject: Re: Europa-List: What engine for my Europa?
--> <fklein@orcasonline.com>
on 11/6/04 12:50 PM, Richard Sementilli at rsementi@gmail.com wrote:
> --> <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 if feel 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?
>
I forward the following at the request of Alex Bowman, amhd@shaw.ca
Fred
A194
Your pros & cons re the available engines for the Europa were
beautifully discribed. Three years ago, I too, was facing this
canundrum. I discussed the problem with Keith Wilson while at Europa's
home base in Yorkshire 1999, but he was not helpful. May I add to your
cons re the Jabiru 3300? It achieves its 120 HP at an R.P.M. much too
high for a propellor to be efficient.
My final choice was a CAM 125 (Honda) developed by Firewall Forward,
Sidney, B.C. On the con side, it is heavy. As delivered it weighed 247
lbs. With care 17 ibs. were removed from the engine; this included
parts of the casting pertinent only to automobiles. A smaller 35 amp
alternator was used. I believe that the reduction unit could be reduced
by 20 lbs. at least. A friend who has been most helpful in this
conversion has designed a lighter version of this unit.
On the pro side: We have an engine that produces 130 HP; it has
VTech; has the legendary reliability of the Honda engine; great fuel
economy and it uses automobile fuel.
The deciding factor in the choice of this engine was that it was a
four in line cylinder arrangement. We were able to move the engine
towards the firewall, between the foot wells. In other words, the C of
G of the CAM 125 is 5.5" closer to the firewall than the C of G of the
Rotax 914. My Europa carries no lead except the lead in the battery and
in the flight control mass balances. The battery was moved rearward by
approx. 30".
We designed a cooling system for this engine untilizing two motorcycle
radiators and carefully crafted ducts and exits to reduce drag and still
provide adequate cooling. To me, this is the most satisfying portion of
our input; this has been very successful, and light.
My first flight was in May 04. My only snags were - an intermittant
transponder and friction between the inner aspect of the ailerons and
the flaps, in the clean configuration. My preliminary performance
figures were derived without the use of a GPS. Now I have a Garmin 295
and will crunch real numbers. An incident on my way to Arlington,
Washington in July 04 caught me like a startled fawn. The throttle
linkage fractured while over the Gulf Islands. Fortunately we had done
"what ifs" in the design phase of our conversion, and had spring loaded
the throttle butterfly to the full throttle position. The nearest
airport was 20 miles to the stern. The incident happened at 2,500'
south east bound. Before the 180 degree turn was completed, the
indicated airspeed exceeded 200 mph. The landing was without incident,
but I noted that the propeller (Airmaster) stopped with the ignition off
when the gear and flaps were extended at 90 mph. My son was with me, on
his first flight, and was quiet, watching things unfold - but not
crumple.
Our flaw was the design of our throttle linkage - Honda knew better.
We acquiesed, and replaced the design with Honda's. The throttle
corrections have been completed, and I'll fly solo until I'm certain all
is well.
In a previous career, I was the senior engineering flight test pilot
for the Royal Canadian Airforce at Canadair Ltd, Cartierville, Quebec.
No military aircraft that I flew had less snags than my wonderful
Europa.
Alex Bowman amhd@shaw.ca
P.S. in 2002 this engine cost $12,000. US
P.S. An in-flight photo can be seen on the Matronics Photoshare site,
posted Oct. 23, '04,1852656-R1-018-7A.jpg
|