Date: 31 Dec 1996 14:33:06 -0800 From: "Judd Stewart" Subject: COZY: Forwarded from Wayne Judd Stewart wrote: > > RE>COZY: Carbon fiber plenum engine... 12/30/96 > > On subject of composite plenums, > > I've seen quite a few fiberglass installations, but my conservative side > tells me it's not such a hot idea. Wouldn't you want to use a fire proof > material in this area such as aluminum etc.? > > Judd For what it's worth... When Scott Swing built the first 'glass plenum, I questioned the heat durability of the assembly. What I didn't know was that the resin used for the plenum was NOT their standard epoxy, but a higher temp, post cured mix that is good for about 350-400F. It was designed for and is still in the Franklin powered Velocity. I've checked it several times since then and it's holding up quite well. This is not a plug for Velocity, but (hopefully) a useful bit of information. I live only a few miles from the field and am good friends with the Swings. They are DOERS!! always coming up with new ideas. Some are put into practice and others are dropped. They are also very willing to share their experience and when applicable I'll be glad to copy the group. A while back I offered to write a report on the new constant speed IVO prop. Well I'm getting close, the Franklin/Velocity has well over 50hrs on the prop and there is another one on a 200hp IO360 Lyc that is gathering hours. When the prop on the IO360 has a good 40-50hrs on it, I'll write the report. Seems that the 4 cylinder engine's impulse is harder on the props. Have a Safe, Prosperous, & Happy 1997 !!! Wayne Lanza ------------------ RFC822 Header Follows ------------------ Received: by cpqm.saic.com with SMTP;30 Dec 1996 17:12:47 -0800 Return-Path: <"wlanza@iu.net@wlanza"@iu.NET> Received: from mx.West.saic.com by cpmx.mail.saic.com; Mon, 30 Dec 96 17:14:26 -0800 Received: from bb.iu.net by mx.west.saic.com (PMDF V5.0-6 #16630) id <0E397G3AY00NFX@mx.west.saic.com> for Judd_Stewart@cpqm.mail.saic.com; Mon, 30 Dec 1996 17:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from LOCALNAME (netport-69.iu.net [198.69.25.109]) by bb.iu.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA09320 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 1996 20:18:16 -0500 Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 08:13:41 -0800 From: Wayne Lanza <"wlanza@iu.net@wlanza"@iu.NET> Subject: Re: COZY: Re: COZY- Carbon fiber plenu To: Judd Stewart Message-id: <199612310118.UAA09320@bb.iu.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; U) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit References: Date: Mon, 06 Jan 1997 14:24:57 -0400 From: Carlos Vicente Leon Organization: Maquinaria Diekmann Subject: Re: COZY: cozy TWIN dwschaefer@postoffice.worldnet.att.net wrote: > > What an interesting idea ..! > > Do you have pictures or drawings of the engine installation you can > E-Mail me? This has to be the most creative idea yet for engine > mounting in a Cozy. Only yesterday we started taxi tests of our cozy twin. We have taken a couple of pictures but have no former drawings we can send. We should have some pictures to scan available within the next three weeks. Let us say that it is nice to have much needed moral support for our rather radical idea. On the taxi tests things went very nicely although we were not able to do many tests since we did not have the wings on. We were mainly testing temperature behaviour of our Suzuki engines. Regards Carlos and Ruben Leon (Bros) Cozy MK IV, YV 22X Varieze, YV-11X Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 08:47:07 -0600 (CST) From: Bill Jackson Subject: COZY: zoche engines Builders, This may be old news for many of you but I thought I would pass it along. Begin included message --------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 07 Jan 97 08:28:25 EST From: Georg Zoche <101613.444@CompuServe.COM> To: Bill Jackson Subject: Re: status Message-ID: <970107132824_101613.444_JHP12-9@CompuServe.COM> Content-Length: 1547 X-Lines: 38 Status: RO Sir, thank you for your e-mail. So far we have accumulated over 2500 hours of bench testing, in January 1995 we began with the testing of engines assembled out of quantity production components. In order to develop firewall-forward solutions we are operating cowled engines in our own windtunnel. We plan to have the first flight this year in a Westinghouse airship using ZO 02A engines. The first fixed-wing aircraft to use our engines will be the aerobatic competition aircraft EXTRA 300 which is also scheduled to fly the ZO 02A. We are currently in the concurrent JAR-E (European) and FAR 33 certification program. The usual way would have been to address the European (JAR-E) certification first before handling the US (FAR 33) certification procedure. With both the German and US aviation authorities having agreed upon a concurrent certification, we expect to have both Type Certificates available during 1998 - but, as with any leading edge technology, precise schedules are difficult to predict. It is part of our company policy to sell certified engines only; we consider the certification as a further proof of the design validity and production quality. The start of series production still is at least two years away. Prices will be competitive to e.g. Lycoming engines. Zoche Antriebstechnik is a privately owned company; no stocks are traded publicly. To obtain further data you might want to poll our brochure from our fax (++49 89 342451) or visit our webpage at: http://193.26.97.194/ Sincerely, Dr. Stefan Ittner ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- end of included message Bill Jackson Land Management Lab Land Inventory and Monitoring U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Construction Engineering Research Lab Champaign, IL 61821 Date: Thu, 16 Jan 97 8:00:52 EST From: "Nick J Ugolini" Subject: COZY: Plumbing I am working on my Long EZ and have a question about the plumbing on my engine. Lycoming O-235 C1 There is a plate between my carburetor and manifold. This is attached to my manifold pressure gage and a - - - hose that goes through what appears to be a PCV valve , to a vertical loop and attached to an valve?? .something.. attached into my stbd exhaust. The crankcase vents directly overboard via a tube attached to the lower cowl just before the prop (no valves or separators. DOES ANYONE KNOW WHAT THIS MEANS? Southern Division, Naval Facilities Engineering Command P.O. Box 190010 N. Charleston, SC 29419-9010 Date: Thu, 16 Jan 97 13:29:32 EST From: "Nick J Ugolini" Subject: COZY: Re: plumbing Lee Devlin wrote, Hi Nick, I had a hard time understanding this posting. Specifically, I didn't know what you meant by a - - - hose and a stbd exhaust. Maybe an edit didn't take. The crankcase vent sounds like a pretty standard for a LongEZ. Mine has an aluminum tube bonded to the lower cowling and a standard rubber automotive hose held in place with band clamps. My friend's longEZ has a separator that looks like a derby hat. There's a baffle inside to allow the mist to condense and a little drain plug on it. Hi Lee, As far as my plumbing goes, the crankcase vents directly overboard thru a hose with nothing in between. The carburetor goes through the PCV valve, thru a Tee in the line after the PVC valve and before the exhaust pipe. and directly to the exhaust fitting (Brock exhaust, two into one pipe) thru some sort of funky looking valve or manufactured part which threads onto the exhaust pipe. The one side of the Tee is plugged off. I am trying to understand why the carb is connected directly to the exhaust, or SHOULD the capped tee be hooked up to the crankcase vent. Possible. Or should I trash the hold PCV system. Crankcase ------>air carb------------ PCV -------- Tee ---------- funny exhaust connection | cap Ideas? Southern Division, Naval Facilities Engineering Command P.O. Box 190010 N. Charleston, SC 29419-9010 The following was included as an attachement. Please use UUDECODE to retrieve it. The original file name was 'ATTRIBS.BND'. begin 666 ATTRIBS.BND M0F5Y;VYD(%!A8VME9"!!='1R:6)U=&5S```+0514*```````4F4Z('!L=6UB M:6YG```````````````````````````````````````````````````````` M```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` M`$YI8VL@2B!59V]L:6YI```````````````````````````````````````` M``````````````````````````````````!(6DDX*T%#8G)M```````````` M````````0F5Y;VYD(%!R;W!R:65T87)Y($1A=&$:`````!$`````````!`!: M!@``````````````````````````5&5X=/T$3&5E($1E=FQI;B!W2!F M&AA=7-T('!I M<&4N("!4:&4@;VYE('-I9&4@;V8@=&AE(%1E92!I2!T;R!T:&4@97AH875S="P@;W(@4TA/54Q$('1H M92!C87!P960@=&5E(&)E(&AO;VME9"!U<"!T;R!T:&4@8W)A;FMC87-E('9E M;G0N("!0;W-S:6)L92X@($]R('-H;W5L9"!)('1R87-H('1H92!H;VQD(%!# M5B!S>7-T96TN"B`@("`*0W)A;FMC87-E("`M+2TM+2T^86ER"@IC87)B+2TM M+2TM+2TM+2TM(%!#5B`M+2TM+2TM+2!4964@+2TM+2TM+2TM+2!F=6YN>2!E M>&AA=7-T(&-O;FYE8W1I;VX@"@D)"0D)("!\"@D)"0D)8V%P"B!)9&5A2!F&AA=7-T('!I<&4N M("!4:&4@;VYE('-I9&4@;V8@=&AE(%1E92!I2!T;R!T:&4@97AH875S="P@;W(@4TA/54Q$('1H92!C M87!P960@=&5E(&)E(&AO;VME9"!U<"!T;R!T:&4@8W)A;FMC87-E('9E;G0N M("!0;W-S:6)L92X@($]R('-H;W5L9"!)('1R87-H('1H92!H;VQD(%!#5B!S M>7-T96TN"B`@("`*0W)A;FMC87-E("`M+2TM+2T^86ER"@IC87)B+2TM+2TM M+2TM+2TM(%!#5B`M+2TM+2TM+2!4964@+2TM+2TM+2TM+2!F=6YN>2!E>&AA M=7-T(&-O;FYE8W1I;VX@"@D)"0D)("!\"@D)"0D)8V%P"B!)9&5A for cozy_builders@hpwarhw.an.hp.com; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 14:45:11 PST Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 14:44:40 -0800 From: hrogers@SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Howard Rogers) Subject: Re: COZY: Re: plumbing >Lee Devlin wrote, > >Hi Nick, > >I had a hard time understanding this posting. Specifically, I didn't >know what you meant by a - - - hose and a stbd exhaust. Maybe an edit >didn't take. > >The crankcase vent sounds like a pretty standard for a LongEZ. Mine >has an aluminum tube bonded to the lower cowling and a standard >rubber automotive hose held in place with band clamps. My friend's >longEZ has a separator that looks like a derby hat. There's a baffle >inside to allow the mist to condense and a little drain plug on it. > >Hi Lee, >As far as my plumbing goes, the crankcase vents directly overboard thru a >hose with nothing in between. The carburetor goes through the PCV valve, >thru a Tee in the line after the PVC valve and before the exhaust pipe. and >directly to the exhaust fitting (Brock exhaust, two into one pipe) thru >some sort of funky looking valve or manufactured part which threads onto >the exhaust pipe. The one side of the Tee is plugged off. I am trying to >understand why the carb is connected directly to the exhaust, or SHOULD the >capped tee be hooked up to the crankcase vent. Possible. Or should I >trash the hold PCV system. > >Crankcase ------>air > >carb------------ PCV -------- Tee ---------- funny exhaust connection > | > cap > Ideas? > > >Southern Division, Naval Facilities Engineering Command >P.O. Box 190010 >N. Charleston, SC 29419-9010 Nick, I may not be able to answer your questions about the PVC system, but if it is the same one that was covered in a back issue of Canard Pusher, your answers will probably be there. A friend of mine installed that PVC system on his EZ, and was thrilled with it. It just about eliminated all irritating "seepage" type oil leaks, for one thing. If I'm not mistaken, the "funky looking" cylinder you mention, right at the exhaust, is probably a check valve, to prevent a damaging blow-back, should the engine backfire. On another note, it is worth mentioning here: A breather line should have an exit INSIDE the cowl, as well as outside. This is to prevent a growing ice ball that could form on the breather outlet tube from totally blocking off the breather, and doing something nasty, like blowing out the engine nose-seal, followed by all the oil. It is simple to do, without making a mess. Just make a cut with a hacksaw, perpendicular to the axis of the aluminum tube, a little less than 1/4 of the way through the tube. You might want to stop drill the ends of the cut. Then crimp the upper portion of the tube inward a bit. Oil running down the inside of the tube will still drip outside the cowl, but venting is possible, into the warm engine space. One of those lessons you don't want to learn "the hard way". Howard Rogers A&P 2005148 Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 08:52:34 -0500 From: Paul Burkhardt Subject: Re: COZY: Re: plumbing Oil running down the inside of the tube will still drip outside the cowl, but venting is possible, into the warm engine space. One of those lessons you don't want to learn "the hard way". speaking of the breather line, where inside the cowling is a good spot to place the tube. I've seen some planes with a tube running alongside the exhaust tubes, I assumed this was the breather tube. Any comments. Paul Burkhardt Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 13:34:35 -0500 (EST) From: Westlande@aol.com Subject: COZY: Lord Mounts? If you use an engine mount with a Dynafocal ring, you need to buy the rubber Lord Mounts. ACS and Wicks carry generic mounts for quite a bit less in two flavors, regular and heavy duty, the later being about $60 more. Is there any reason to spend the extra $60 or is going to be the first place in my project where I can actually save a dollar :-)? Has anyone had any negative experiences with the "generics"? Eric Westland Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 19:47:28 -0500 From: Paul Burkhardt Subject: COZY: RE: cozy Lord mounts Has anyone had any negative experiences with the "generics"? Nat calls for the heavy duty. I initallly bought the regular duty and returned them when I realized I made a mistake. They are somewhat different in their makeup. I would also advise you to purchase the AN bolt for them two sizes smaller then what Nat specs. I believe he calls for an AN x-35, I believe I used an x-33. Theses are just right for them I keep thinking to call him concerning that I just never get around to it. Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:23:33 -0500 From: Jim Hocut Subject: COZY: Engine Mount ? A friend who's building a velocity has an engine mount that came with his kit that he doesn't need because he's using a Subaru engine and designing his own engine mount (much braver than I). I was told that this is a bed mount designed for a Franklin. Does anyone know what modifications, if any, would be required to use this mount on a Cozy IV? Jim Hocut jhocut@mindspring.com by SERV05.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU (PMDF V5.1-4 #16063) with SMTP id <01IEJWUPMFZA0022EN@SERV05.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU> for cozy_builders@hpwarhw.an.hp.com; Thu, 23 Jan 1997 12:43:16 PST Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 12:43:01 -0800 From: hrogers@SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Howard Rogers) Subject: Re: COZY: Re: plumbing >speaking of the breather line, where inside the cowling is a good spot >to place the tube. I've seen some planes with a tube running alongside >the exhaust tubes, I assumed this was the breather tube. Any comments. >Paul Burkhardt Paul, there is no magic or special "ideal" way to do this. Common sense should be your guide. On most engine installations, the breather tube arches up a bit, before heading straight down and out the bottom of the cowl in some location that can conveniently deposit the oily mess on the underside of the airplane. Keep the bend radii large, avoiding kinks This is important. If you do get a kink, you will blow out the nose seal on the engine, lose your oil overboard, and possibly have a really bad day. Support it well, so no part of it can flop or vibrate excessively. Beware of chafe. Use a large rubber grommet at the exit point, to protect the cowl as well as the breather tube. One easy way to secure it to an engine mount, for example, would be to use a wide nylon ty-wrap, threaded through a short piece of oil-resistant rubber hose, around the breather line, back through the hose piece, then around the engine mount tube. This is fine on steel, but don't use this method on an aluminum member, unless you totally protect the aluminum from the ty-wrap with a layer of rubber (like a slit piece of larger diameter rubber hose). I would advise you to keep it as far from hot exhaust pipes as conveniently possible, because a baking doesn't do much good for any of these parts. Howard Rogers, A&P 2005148 Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 11:27:38 -0800 From: Michael Antares Subject: COZY: Subaru installation This last weekend I visited a friend of mine who has an NSI Subaru in his Kitfox. I have to say that I have been a diehard 'use only aircraft engine' person so I'm prejudiced against auto engine conversions. HOWEVER... His engine is now a turbocharged 180 HP version with a cockpit adjustable prop. The firewall forward assembly (which he said took some 4 hours! to install (dynafocal mount) cost him approximately $13000 with prop! I was extremely impressed with the workmanship including dual electronic ignition. He said he took his Kitfox (weighing around 850 pounds) to 16000 feet and was still climbing at 1000 fpm. He cruises at 3500 rpm and has never had it over 4500 because it maxes out his VNE although the engine is redlined much higher. It seemed to me (being very naive in this area however) that the installation of the radiator would be much simpler than coping with all of the baffling surrounding a Lycoming or Franklin. Carlos is also building a Glastar and is going to install a 240 HP NSI Subaru that he believes will weigh under 300 pounds. Food for thought... Michael 6077 Old Redwood Highway Penngrove CA 94951 707.664.1171 Cozy#413 Finished through chap 14 except chap 13. Chaps 16 & 24 mostly finished. Now on chap 19 and 20. One wing/winglet finished, working on second. Date: Wed, 29 Jan 97 07:32:13 EST From: MISTER@neesnet.com Subject: Re: COZY: Subaru installation Michael Antares wrote: "This last weekend I visited a friend of mine who has an NSI Subaru in his Kitfox. I have to say that I have been a diehard 'use only aircraft engine' person so I'm prejudiced against auto engine conversions. HOWEVER..." Michael: Can you provide any information on sources and suppliers of Subaru NSI engines and installation hardware? Bob Misterka N342RM From: "LOUIS LAURIELLO" Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 10:37:31 +0800 Subject: COZY: Re: AIRCRAFT ENGINES Builders: I received information on a mazda 3 rotor engine, and with the authors permission am posting it for all to view. His email is in the text if you wish to contact him. > > ROTARY ENGINE POWER > > GRANT S. NICHOLLS > 12 ARISTOY CLOSE > CONIFER GROVE > TAKANINI > AUCKLAND > NEW ZEALAND > PH / FAX 64-9-2988848 > E-MAIL 105654.1753 @ COMPUSERVE. COM > > ATTN LOUIS LAURIELLO > E-MAIL LLAURIEL@SVC.PICKER.COM > > DEAR SIR, > THANK YOU FOR YOUR ENQUIRY ABOUT MAZDA 20B, 3 ROTOR, ROTARY ENGINES. > WE HAVE AVAILABLE PICTURES OF THE MAZDA 20B ENGINE A TRIPLE ROTOR, TWIN > TURBO, ROTARY ENGINE SHOULD YOU REQUIRE AN INFORMATION PACK. > THIS ENGINE WAS PRODUCED BETWEEN 1990 AND 1994 BY MAZDA JAPAN IN LIMITED > NUMBERS. THEREFORE THESE ENGINES ARE HIGHLY SORT AFTER. > ALL ENGINES ARE EX USED VEHICLES WITH LOW KILOMETERS. > ALL ENGINES ARE CHECKED FOR INTEGRITY PRIOR TO SHIPPING. > PARTS AVAILABILITY AND SUPPLY IS NOT A PROBLEM. > THE BASIC CORE OF THIS ENGINE WITHOUT TURBO`s OR FUEL INJECTION CAN PRODUCE > OVER 250 HP NORMALLY ASPIRATED, WITH SLIGHT PORTING 320 HP. > AS SUPPLIED TO YOU, 350 HP WITH TURBO`s AND FUEL INJECTORS. > THIS ENGINE IF TRIPLE TURBO CHARGED AND PORTED CAN PRODUCE UP TO 900 HP > BUT IS AT PRESENT LIMITED BY CURRENT PROPELLER SPEED REDUCTION UNITS OVER > 450 HP. > THIS ENGINE WILL FIT INSIDE MOST EXISTING FIRE WALL FORWARD DIMENSIONS WITH > LITTLE MODIFICATION. > THIS ENGINE INSTALLATION WILL NORMALLY WEIGH LESS THAN CURRENT PRODUCTION > LYCOMING ENGINES OF SIMILAR HORSE POWER. > THE TOTAL ENGINE INSTALLATION IS AROUND 400 POUNDS COMPLETE. > THE BASIC CORE OF THE 20B WOULD WEIGH APPROX 35% MORE THAN THE 13B ENGINE > CORE AT 250 Ibs. > THE EXTRA POWER OF THIS ENGINE PROVIDES A LARGE MARGIN FOR WEIGHT. > THERE ARE ALUMINUM HOUSINGS FOR THIS ENGINE THAT REPLACE THE CAST IRON > HOUSINGS BETWEEN ROTORS SHOULD WEIGHT BE A PROBLEM. HOWEVER THESE ARE > EXPENSIVE. > THE 20B ENGINE CORE DIAMETER IS 13 INCHES OR 320mm THE SAME DIAMETER AS > THE 13B ENGINE. > LENGTH IS 26 INCHES OR 666mm. > SUMP TO TOP OF MANIFOLDS 28 INCHES OR 700mm. > CENTER OF CRANK SHAFT TO OUT SIDE TURBO HOUSING 13.5 INCHES OR 340mm. > WITHOUT THE TURBO CHARGES THE ENGINE WOULD HAVE A WIDTH OF 320mm HEIGHT > 700mm AND WOULD REQUIRE LITTLE MODIFICATION.WITHOUT THE TURBO CHARGES AND > NORMALLY ASPIRATED THE ENGINE WOULD HAVE A WIDTH OF 320mm HEIGHT 320mm > EXCLUDING ASSESSORIES > THIS ENGINE CAN BE MOUNTED ON ITS SIDE. > 350 HP IS APPROX 6000 RPM, ROTOR SPEED 2000 RPM. > PISTON ENGINE FUEL CONSUMPTION POINT 4, ROTARY ENGINES POINT 5. > THE ROTARY WEIGHS LESS THAN A PISTON ENGINE AND PRODUCES MORE POWER > THEREFORE FUEL CONSUMPTION FOR THE SAME DISTANCE IS ABOUT EQUAL. > A TBO OF UP TO 3000 HOURS COULD BE EXPECTED. > OVERHAUL IS VERY INEXPENSIVE COMPARED TO CERTIFIED ENGINES. > WE DO NOT SUPPLY ENGINE TO FIRE WALL MOUNTS. > THE PSRU WE RECOMMEND IS A ROSS AERO PROPELLOR SPEED REDUCTION UNIT. > THE 20B ENGINE PACKAGE INCLUDES TURBOs. > > THE SPECIAL FEATURES OF THIS ENGINE ARE ITS LIGHT WEIGHT, SMALL SIZE, TWO > SPARK PLUGS PER ROTOR, TWO FUEL INJECTORS PER ROTOR, SMALL NUMBER OF MOVING > PARTS, RUNS EXCEPTIONALLY SMOOTHLY AND IS CONSIDERED TO BE MORE RELIABLE > THAN A PISTON ENGINE. > PISTON ENGINES THAT ARE RACED ARE USUALLY RECONDITIONED AFTER EVERY RACE, > ROTARY ENGINES WILL LAST A RACING SEASON. > > WE CAN ALSO PROVIDE WITH 20B ENGINES AS ACCESSORIES; PROPELLER SPEED > REDUCTION UNITS, DUAL IGNITION DISTRIBUTORS, AND ELECTRONIC IGNITION FUEL > COMPUTERS, COILS AND POWER PACKS. > THE BASIC ENGINE PACKAGE DOES NOT INCLUDE IGNITION, FUEL COMPUTERS, > IGNITION POWER PACKS, COILS, RADIATORS OR HEAT EXCHANGERS. > ALL THESE COMPONENTS NEED TO BE SOURCED SPECIFICALLY FOR YOUR FIRE WALL > FORWARD REQUIREMENTS. > > LIST OF COMPONENT PRICES; > (1)MAZDA 20B ENGINE $3900-00 > (2)ELECTRONIC IGNITION AND FUEL COMPUTER $1250-00 > (3)COIL $160-00 > (4)POWER PACK ($105-00 EACH) 3 REQUIRED $315-00 > (5)FREIGHT (NEW ZEALAND TO LOS ANGELES) $300-00 > CUSTOMS CLEARANCE IS THE PURCHASERS RESPONSIBILITY. > (6)PSRU's (REFER CHRIS, ROSS AERO, TUCSON, AZ,USA) PH 602-7477877 > ALL PRICES IN UNITED STATES DOLLARS. > INFORMATION PACK $10-00 > A DEPOSIT OF $1000-00 IS REQUIRED WITH ORDER. > > > > Louis Lauriello 5963 Rio Valle Dr. Bonsall, CA 92003 e-mail: LLAURIEL@SVC.PICKER.COM Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 02:35:02 -0500 (EST) From: Lenpilot@aol.com Subject: COZY: Lycoming Airboat Engine ? I located the following ads while browsing through the Tampa Tribune classified section under Marine ads. I am not completely sure if these are sutible for use in aircraft, but if they are (as the second ad implies), they might be a good buy for someone in the market for an engine. Maybe someone with some more knowlege in this area can shed some light on this. Does Lycoming manufacture seperate engines for use in airboats? If these are truly aircraft engines this may be a great deal. I am curious if this market might be an option. These prices are awfully cheap for aircraft engines. Especially interesting is the "180 Lycoming air craft. 5hrs on the eng" I don't know too much about this, does someone know more about why this would be so cheap? Are they a different type of motor? Or is it possible that airboat owners don't realize what they have? Could this actually work? I have never seen anything about this anywhere (kitplanes, Sport Aviation, Etc.) Are these the same engines but cheaper because they go on boats, and therefore lycoming is not exposed to the same liability? Can they be converted to aircraft engines? Does anyone know more about this? The following can be found at http://www.tampatrib.com And follow the links to the classified section. Miscellaneous $7,000 (2/11/97) 11' Aluminum Full Deck Airboat 180 Lycoming, $7,000 941-453-6361 Miscellaneous $5,000 (2/11/97) 11`Airboat, 180 Lycoming air craft. 5hrs on the eng, strong. $5,000 obo. 941-692-2010. Leonard Farneth lenpilot@aol.com BTW. there are probably more in the Miami Herald. It would be great if this could work out. Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 08:31:21 -0500 From: ponciroli@postoffice.worldnet.att.net Subject: COZY: Lycoming Airboat Engines The engines used in airboats are usually run out engines (2000+++) when they are installed in the airboat. I wouldn't use one on a bet unless it was to be used in another airboat. Don Ponciroli ponciroli@postoffice.worldnet.att.net From: Sid & Mari Lloyd Subject: RE: COZY: Lycoming Airboat Engine ? Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 09:03:56 -0600 A local builder did exactly this- bought a used airboat with an O-360 on it, sold the boat and rebuilt the engine. It's a great idea for experimentals. Sid Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 19:16:09 -0500 From: Rick Roberts Subject: COZY: Lycoming Airboat Engine ? Leonard Wrote: Being the cheap mother that I am I would be seriously inclined to check this out. It shouldn't be too difficult to hear the engine run, check compression, take an oil sample, check appearance. etc. If they run they couldn't be in much worst condition than an engine out of a wreck or a junk yard. I wouldn't be as religous as Don is, as long as the claimed rebuild was done with good parts. If it's a really good deal, give the guy a small deposit and pull a jug for inspection. If the pistons are Lycoming or FAA-PMA I'd seriously consider it. If not, either get your deposit back, or eat it as a lesson learned. Rick Roberts So cheap I bought an old O-540 since it was less expensive. by SERV05.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU (PMDF V5.1-4 #16063) with SMTP id <01IFEDDD4MT6002QS5@SERV05.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU> for cozy_builders@hpwarhw.an.hp.com; Fri, 14 Feb 1997 08:00:12 PST Date: Fri, 14 Feb 1997 08:00:54 -0800 From: hrogers@SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Howard Rogers) Subject: Re: COZY: Lycoming Airboat Engine ? Rick Roberts wrote: >If it's a really good deal, give the guy a small >deposit and pull a jug for inspection. If the pistons are Lycoming or >FAA-PMA I'd seriously consider it. If not, either get your deposit back, >or eat it as a lesson learned. > >Rick Roberts >So cheap I bought an old O-540 since it was less expensive. I might add to this another small precaution that wouldn't be difficult to inspect for. Bring a magnetic base dial indicator with you, pull the prop, and check the runout on the crank flange. Airboat drivers might not be as "picky" about a bent flange. Howard Rogers, A&P 2005148 Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:38pm From: "Vance, John" Subject: RE: COZY: Engine On Wednesday, February 19, 1997 12:06 PM, Eric Westland wrote: > 2) Still running, has not been sitting somewhere unknown building corrosion > on the parts. You can remove it and then properly store it until you are > ready to fly. If those of you knowledgeable have time, I would like to hear about proper engine storing methods. Thanks, John Vance - Cozy III on hold since separation/divorce - jvance@nepool.com by SERV05.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU (PMDF V5.1-4 #16063) with SMTP id <01IFLDD76IXY003GM5@SERV05.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU> for cozy_builders@hpwarhw.an.hp.com; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:15:40 PST Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:16:19 -0800 From: hrogers@SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Howard Rogers) Subject: Re: COZY: Engine >Hi There All, > >Thanks to all for all the advice received on previous matters. > >I have been offered a 2000 Hr O-360 Lyc with VP prop attached (it >actually comes attached to an A/C that stalled properly during a landing >- prop and Eng OK - Passengers as well - Fuselage crumpled from rear >forward - imagine a very low level tailslide) Are you absolutely SURE there was no prop-strike? Better check the flange runout with a dial indicator, anyway. >The Question: is the VP unit (tractor) any good on Cozy? >(I like, but its two blade - and could it be converted?) Simple answer: No. Too heavy, and doesn't work well in the pusher configuration, even if you could convert it to a pusher. >Is a 2000 Hr not to much (I know the A/C and owners - it was still going >well) Simple answer: Time for an overhaul. --Howard Rogers A&P 2005148 Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:06:46 -0500 (EST) From: Westlande@aol.com Subject: Re: COZY: Engine In a message dated 2/19/97 2:46:31 PM, cvh@iafrica.com (Chris van Hoof) wrote: >Is a 2000 Hr not to much (I know the A/C and owners - it was still going >well) > >Any answers on the questions in between the lines are welcome as well :-) Chris, I don't know how common these engines are in your country, but if it was available in the US, I'd snap it up. I can't speak to the prop, but the engine has several things going for it: 1) Known history 2) Still running, has not been sitting somewhere unknown building corrosion on the parts. You can remove it and then properly store it until you are ready to fly. 3) Constant speed prop means the crankshaft bore is probably fine and the pitting S.B. will not apply. 4) You can expect to have to rebuild it sooner than later, but if it is still going strong then there is no reason you can't bolt it on and fly it at least until you have your test flying complete. Doing it this way has the big advantage of not having to worry about seating new rings on a freshly over hauled engine. Sounds like a keeper from what you described. You may try to get a guarantee that the crank and crankcase will be serviceable when overhaul time comes. Those are the _expensive_ parts. Good Luck, Eric Westland Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 19:09:13 +0200 From: edegov@aztec.co.za (ernie de goveia) Subject: COZY: Cozy Engine Hi Chris and All Good one, nice to have an engine in the pipeline. I have heard that to convert a puller engine to a pusher, the thrust washers on the crankshaft have to be moved. This may or may not entail a machining operation on the crank.Is this so or am I spreading rumours :-) ? Comments eagerly awaited. Ernie & Cozy3 in Cape Town Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 14:17:55 -0800 From: Chris van Hoof Organization: C van Hoof - Architect Subject: COZY: Engine Hi There All, Thanks to all for all the advice received on previous matters. I have been offered a 2000 Hr O-360 Lyc with VP prop attached (it actually comes attached to an A/C that stalled properly during a landing - prop and Eng OK - Passengers as well - Fuselage crumpled from rear forward - imagine a very low level tailslide) So Eng and instruments all attached to A/C - if I don't muck up the negotiations it could come at a reasonable price. The Question: is the VP unit (tractor) any good on Cozy? (I like, but its two blade - and could it be converted?) Is a 2000 Hr not to much (I know the A/C and owners - it was still going well) Any answers on the questions in between the lines are welcome as well :-) Thanx Chris #219 ( That 'll make me build faster :-)) Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 07:04:55 -0500 (EST) From: Wschertz@aol.com Subject: Re: RE: COZY: Engine Tony Bingelis book "Firewall forward" and Bingelis on Engines gives the procedures in great detail. Highly recommended for any builder, lots of good information. Bill Schertz Date: Wed, 12 Mar 1997 23:44:40 -0500 (EST) From: N11TE@aol.com Subject: Fwd: COZY: nose lift --------------------- Forwarded message: Subj: Re: COZY: nose lift Date: 97-03-12 11:25:32 EST From: N11TE To: CCady Really nice picture of your E-Racer, Cliff! Re: your questions on IO-540... has been a really interesting project. A lot of time and effort. But this is what I really like to do. I originally tried to get Weldtech to build a mount for this application. But, this was when he was experiencing heart problems. Also, he has no engineering ability. I ended up getting Jack Wilhelmson to do the cad-cam engineering for me... thanks again Jack. My goal was to install this bigger engine without upsetting the weight and balance of the plane. My current solution is to remove both mags (dual electronic ignition), remove the vacuum pump (all electric instruments), move the vernatherm from the accessory case to the remote oil filter (Lycoming has a kit for this), and take off the standard "wobble" fuel pump and replace with an AN fuel pump mounted on a special vacuum pump adapter so that the firewall can be dished above the spar. After doing all this, I can now move the engine right up against the firewall. I have the engine blocked in position and it appears that this IO-540 will now fit in the standard Aerocanard 4-cylinder cowlings. Also should be noted is that this engine is the narrow-deck, lighter-weight engine. As configured with light weight starter and alternator, dry, it weighed 368 lbs. Only a small amount more than Jeff Russell's LIO-360. If you move the battery from the main spar to the nose, you will balance 85 pounds of additional engine weight, alone, which is much more than it appears I will need from initial weight and balance calculations. Please note that this is only an overview of work in progress, I am not suggesting that anyone attempt these changes. I am attempting to be very careful in engineering all of the changes but I recognize I am creating a new airplane. And that I will have to do all my own testing. I saw the IO-540 Berkut at Oskosh and was very impressed. Good luck with yours. If I can help you in any way please give me a call. Tom Ellis Cozy MK IV Plans #25 Aerocanard Mark VI N11TE@aol.com (812) 867-2275 Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 13:01:23 -0400 (EDT) From: Westlande@aol.com Subject: COZY: Crank Plug?? My IO-360 was formerly set up for a CS prop. To convert it to fixed, I need to remove an allenhead plug at the inside end of the hollow portion of the crank. It is really, really stuck and I don't want to mess it up trying to remove it. Any suggestions on getting to sucker loosened? TIA, Eric Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 20:19:38 -0700 From: Mahan Subject: Re: COZY: Re: Avgas vs. Safe-T-Poxy Ron Lee wrote: > 1) What is it about 100LL that caused the sticking valves due to > lead build-up and is there any way to correct it other than changing > to an unleaded autogas? I am aware that 100LL has a "large" amount > of lead ("large" being unquantified). 100 LL has 2 grams of tetraethyl lead per gallon. 80/87 (red) has 0.5 grams per gallon. The old 91/96 (purple) fuel had (I think) 1 gram per gallon. 100/130 (green) fuel had up to 4.7 grams per gallon. The old 91/96 might be a better choice for my 8.5 to 1 c.r. engine, as several 8.5 to 1 engines were originally certified on 91/96 fuel. It's all academic anyway, now. My point is that the 100LL, at two grams of tetraethyl lead per gallon, has more lead than what several similar c.r. engines were originally designed around. Somehow the lead from the hot exhaust gas condenses on the valve stem instead of all passing out of the exhaust port. The clearance between the valve stem and guide slowly closes up, and the valve begins to stick. Small Continentals are notorious for this on 100LL, and it seems to be a problem for Lycoming O-235L seties engines, too. The O-235L's also have some kind of pocket in the head which lead deposits build up in. Use of the prescribed amount of TCP per gallon is the approved means of combatting lead fouling/valve sticking. Some FBO's will add it to your gas for free, otherwise you'll have to get a can of the stuff and an dispenser srynge. I've considered mixing a witch's brew of 1/2 100LL and 1/2 93 Amoco, to get back to 91/96's 1 gram of tetraethyl lead per gallon, but I've been too lazy to do it since the Amoco 93 seems to work well for me. The mogas seems to leave a blackish deposit in my exhaust stacks, while the 100LL leaves a greyish deposit -- that's about the only difference I can see. Even tried some speed runs with Amoco 93 in one tank and 100LL in the other, then switched back and forth at 5 minute intervals -- didn't see any significant differences. > 2) How would you continue to get specks of foam and fiberglass for > about a year? I assume that even a good vacuuming will leave some > so is that amount something that is to be expected (and corrected by > frequent screen cleaning)? Is there a better way to get those few small > specks out prior to first flight? > I can't top Nigel's contamination story. No matter how hard you try, you always end up with tiny foam balls, epoxy flakes, and fiberglass strands in your gascolator and finger strainer filters. Clean the tanks and flush out the fuel lines before closing out to get out what you can. Fred in Florida Long-EZ N86LE Defiant project Subject: COZY: Lycoming Engine Purchase From: resiebert@juno.com (Reid E. Siebert) Date: Sat, 03 May 1997 11:41:09 EDT Hi Everyone, This week I took the plunge, and ordered an engine for my Cozy. I visited Larry & Harold at Aircraft Engine Resources, in the tiny farming village of Brighton, Iowa, and with their expert advise decided on a set of specs. for a model that would satisfy my operational requirements, and fit in the cramped, hot, Cozy cowling. They are assembling it from their stock of salvaged engines, and parts (I had no core). I specified that all parts would be new, or FAA certified overhauled. They will also deliver the finished product to my hangar door in Illinois, a three hour drive from their shop. The engine is a customized, experimental version of the basic O-360-A1A. Here are some of the details: Accessory Case: I opted for the dual mag case (one mag drive hole, instead of two) partly because I'm running with an Electroaire dual electronic ignition system (which needs only one mag drive for both speed sensors). But mainly because the prop governor mount already has the plumbing and porting installed in the case body. This eliminates the need for the two inch tall adapter pad (and $300) that is required on the two mag hole case. So I have more space to add a prop governor, without having to find, and buy a crankcase which has the pad on the side of the nose section. My neighbor is building an RV-6a with this same engine and accessory case. I compared his engine mount to my Mark IV plans and found the distance from the dynafocal mounts to the firewall to be the same. So then I measured the distance from governor drive pad to the firewall. It was just under seven inches, hopefully enough for my needs. Right now I don't know which governor I will buy. By the way, it looks like the spin-on oil filter has plenty of firewall clearance, for removal. Crankshaft: Overhauled and balanced, from a 200-hp. IO-360, with counterweights removed. Connecting rods are balanced 200-hp. type. Cylinders: Overhauled Cermi-Nil coated barrels (nickel coated, instead of chrome). Heads have new Serdi-seated valves and seats. Springs, push rods and rockers are new. Camshaft is specially ground for use with hyperbolic lifters (used by air boats, and proven to have a longer life than standard lifters). These will allow the valves to stay open a little longer for cooler running, and a little more horsepower. Pistons and rings are new, with compression ratio of 9:1 (instead of 8.7:1). I plan a lot of grass strip, and mountain airport use, so a few more horses are preferred. Yet not so many that the engine is running on the edge of the detonation curve. My kid has to be able to run this thing!!! Crankcase: Overhauled, and yellow tagged, then drilled for reinforcing dowel rods, because of horsepower increase. These also make for tighter fitting case halves, thus reducing oil leakage at the seam. All required external oil system plumbing is installed, including line from prop governor pad to nose section. Guesstimated horsepower, with customization and dual electronic ignition: 184 - 190 hp. I will dyno test it in the future, before installing. Extras thrown in: They will remove the prop governor mounting studs and replace them with helicoil inserts and bolts. This will cut in half the amount of firewall clearance needed to remove the governor (one inch, instead of two). Also supply the primer system lines and fittings, in case I don't go with Airflow Performance fuel injection. They also sold me an overhauled eleven-row oil cooler (for $200), and gave me some salvaged front and rear engine baffling (not inter-cylinder). Some will be useable since I have to make my own cowling, others will be marketable. Paint colors (my choices): Heads are not painted, only alodined, for maximum cooling (paint insulates), and easier crack inspection (those extra horses trying to get out). Barrels and induction tubes will be black (the best heat dissipating paint color). Rocker covers are chromed (they had some sitting on a shelf, also are better heat dissipators than painted). And the rest of the engine will be John Deere Green (hey, this is farm country). It will be an ugly looking beast !!! Engine will be pickled and packaged for long-term storage, because I'm still a couple of years from running it. FYI: Cermi-Nil coated barrels do not corrode when sitting idle, unlike steel nitrided barrels. Price (not including fuel or ignition systems parts): $14,400.00 Delivery in 60-90 days. I had to wait six months for Larry to find a serviceable O-360 case and crank. Now that I've committed to an engine type, I can finish my firewall and gear well layouts, order an engine mount, and do some serious work on this hangar queen. Comments, questions, or criticisms are welcomed. Reid Date: Tue, 6 May 1997 11:20:28 -0700 From: Eric Westland Subject: Re: COZY: engine Chris, I just went though this, took me a long time to finally find an IO-360-A1A 200 HP Lycoming. I am not an A&P, but I have done a lot of research, here is some of what I would check on. 1) The crank MUST be good. It's just too expensive to replace. 2) 200 HP crankcases have a tendency to crack or have fretting on the mating surfaces where the crank goes through. Again, this part needs to be guaranteed somehow. 3) If it is 200 HP, it probably has angle-valve heads. These hold up better than the parallel valve heads, but may not be worth much if they have already been through a TBO. 4) Helicopter engines get their extra power in part from a different cam ground to run at rpm's higher than 2700. Since you would not want your prop spinning at this rate (I think), I would inquire as to the way the cam is ground. 5) Try to get as many of the "little" parts as you can. You won't believe what they cost USED. For example, a flywheel is $375 US, a sump is $400, gears in the accessory case can run $200 each! It adds up fast, they may even be more in RSA. 6) You may need to do a little converting if this engine was designed to run vertically. 7) There area couple of great sites that can help you do some "research". One is the RV archives search engine at http://www.matronics.com/rv-list/search.htm. The second is Greg Travis's engine page at : http://gtravis.ucs.indiana.edu/Engines/index.html The challenge nowdays to building up a good engine centers around finding a good case and crank. Almost all the other parts are made by other companies besides Lycoming, so they are available at competative prices. But since the case and crank are only made by Lycoming at this time, there is only one place to go for a new one and they are expensive. Reid said it took his re-builder six months to find a good used crank and I expect it to get worse before it gets better as there are a lot of folks just like us looking for used engines in this HP range. Of course, Superior keeps promising they will have these parts soon, but it's been years in the making... I hope this helps, I'm Cc'ing to all so they can correct or add to what I have said. Please feel free to get back to me with any more questions. I'll answer them as best I can. Eric Date: Tue, 06 May 1997 11:49:27 -0700 From: C van Hoof Organization: Architect Subject: COZY: engine Hi all, >From the folloing you will notice that I could not get the previous O-360. Got any comments on this attachement, please. I have first refusal so any opinion will be appreciated and the price is right if its not a con. Chris #219 Copied letter from EAA member I met at the Margate EAA Convention: Hi Chris. I trust you also got back from Margate OK? The engine that I have for sale is an HO-360 200 hp Lycoming that came originally out of a Hughs 300. 2 Engines were bought from a Customs auction by Ian Woods from Cape Town in broken down Spares form. The one engine he assembled and fitted into a Vary Viggan and I bought the other lot of spares from him. These parts had all been newly overhauled ( or new ,it is difficult to tell ) I had intended to fit it into a Stampe that I was rebuilding at the time. Anyway . I sold the Stampe and now do not have any use for the engine. I had the parts shipped to Durban and the engineer there did a moonlight job of assembly and inspection. No Logbooks. Well I didnt need them as my airplane was LS1 anyway. There was no Carburettor with the original spares. I swapped the Renault engine that was original with the Stampe, for an IO-360 that came out of an Arrow 180. This engine was Time Ex. The Injector was O/H by Fields (again as a favour ) so, again ,no log entry. So. Now I have an HIO-360. I was willing to take the chance that the injector from the 180 would work on the 200 hp. Anyway C S wants to buy the injector if you are not interested. I am told that could get R80,000.00 for the engine if I could afford to have it reinspected and reassembled with log book entrys. I want around R30000 which I consider a fair price. Cylinder.............R4000each= R16000 Crank ........................= R 8000 Injector......................= R 4000 conrods..............R400each = R 1200 Camshaft......................= R 4000 cranckcase, mags,etc In fact this is what Ishall do if you don't take this engine as is. Our local AMO is adamant that I can get a lot more for it as parts. ANY OPINION AND / OR COMMENT WILL BE APPRECIATED - CHRIS #219 From: "Steve Campbell" Subject: COZY: Franklin/Ivoprop Date: Thu, 8 May 1997 11:20:51 Jim Hocut writes: >I've heard from a Velocity builder that testing with the Franklin >and Ivo is going very well. Anybody have access to any more detailed >information, since what I've got is fifth or sixth hand by the time >it makes it through the grapevine? I heard from Mark Beduhn that Nat will soon be removing the Franklin from his plane and reinstalling his rebuilt Lycoming O-360. He will not be testing the Ivoprop. I called Atlas to talk to them about buying the engine and Pat told me that Nat has 3 or 4 people waiting in line to buy it. Too bad. Pat had some interesting things to say about Nat's testing of the engine, but I will not repeat them here. It looks like we will have to rely on the Velocity tests unless a builder is close to putting a Franklin/Ivoprop in the air. Steve **************************************** Stephen A. Campbell Associate Professor, EE University of Minnesota ***************************************** From: "Krasa-1, Paul" Subject: RE: COZY: Need advice on engine change Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 08:55:48 -0400 >---------- >From: morten@scandisoft.no[SMTP:morten@scandisoft.no] > >Hi folks, > >1. Recommended engines are O-320-E1A/E2A/E2D/E3D >2. Dynafocal Mounts (type 1 = 30 degrees) >3. Screen type oil filter >4. Mechanical fuel pump >5. Slick Magnetos (4250 or 4270) >6. New engine mount from Ken Brock Why not buy an O-320 with a conical mount then you could use your old mount. Save the money for an electronic ignition. I have an O-320 off a Piper Apache with a conical mount. Paul Krasa Long EZ 214LP > > Date: Sat, 26 Jul 1997 21:32:06 -0400 From: Carlos Vicente Leon Organization: Maquinaria Diekmann Subject: COZY: aviation fuel in auto engines This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------C9776C52A12 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit BEWARE ! Aviation fuels will damage auto engines: After 100 hours in our COZY TWIN ( 2 Suzuki 1600cc engines) we have found that all valves have become severely worn, especially intake valves. Apparently 130 octane (green type aviation fuel) somehow attacks the material valves are made off. Some people say it is lead abrasion others that the fuel is too dry. Maybe lead rusts valves more than 95 octane auto gas. REGARDS --------------C9776C52A12 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="A cozy-signature.htm" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="A cozy-signature.htm" CARLOS V. LEON COZY MK IV (twin) YV-22X, VARIEZE YV 11X http://www.infortel.com/cozy COUNTRY: VENEZUELA --------------C9776C52A12-- From: wilhelmson@scra.org Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 09:02:34 -0400 Subject: Re: COZY: aviation fuel in auto engines What you have discovered about aviation fuel in auto engines is not new. Years ago the US Navy had a problem with people stealing av gas for their cars. Av gas is formulated for long stroke engines and burns more slowly. In short stroke auto engines the gas would burn so slowly that the whole exhaust system would get red hot and set the car on fire. It is possible that this is also the cause of your intake valve errosion. Is the errosion on the valve stem or on the valve seats? From: wilhelmson@scra.org Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 09:09:31 -0400 Subject: Re: COZY: aviation fuel in auto engines On second thought, if the problem you are having is the slow burn rate of the av gas you may be able to advance the timing and cure the problem. Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 16:19:34 -0500 From: Curt Smith Subject: COZY: Best 0-320 Choice? I'm at the engine purchasing stage for my (III) project. I have the "standard" Brock 0-320 mount installed. The question is which 0-320's will work and which would be optimal? I assume any of the (dash) D's and E's will work as they all have the Dynafocal mount. Will all accept a fuel pump? What other considerations are relevant? I would, of course, prefer a 160 (the "D's"), but some of the E's have been converted to high compression pistons. I know the "H" is to be avoided, so I'm not even considering that option. I would appreciate any relevant thoughts and advice. Curt Smith Date: Wed, 06 Aug 1997 22:52:16 -0400 From: "Ruben D. Leon" Organization: Centro de Mecanizado Levil Subject: Re: COZY: Did I miss an E-Mail Phillip Johnson wrote: > > At the Oshkosh Cozy forum Nat concluded with a last minute special: He > announced, with glee in his voice, that there had been an announcement > on the net to the effect of "the guys in Venezuela had abandoned their > twin engined coaxial prop Cozy and were replacing this with a standard > aircraft engine". Is this true, or was this good old Nat up to his old > tricks again? > > Phillip Johnson I hope this was a Joke, Carlos and I have had some trouble with aviation fuel (100-130) on the Suzuki valves, which we are changing. Other than that, we are not changing anything else. We are going to use auto fuel from now on. We are happy with our Cozy and have log 105 hours. We dont know if the twin-coaxial configuration is the best, but our Vari-eze gave us much trouble with a O-320 Lycomig that we dont have the jugment to say wich configuration is best. regards, Ruben Leon Cozy Twin YV-22X Vari-Eze YV-11X From: MISTER@neesnet.com Date: Thu, 07 Aug 97 07:39:16 EST Subject: Re: COZY: Best 0-320 Choice? Curt Smith asked:"which 0-320's will work and which would be optimal?" The O320 E3D is 150 hp and has the mechanical fuel pump on the accessory case. That's what I have and I'm very happy with it. I recall when I was at your stage I questioned whether leaded fuels would be available so I went with the low compression engine. Now six years later we are still using 100LL. I still expect to see a non leaded avgas at about 87 octane which would make the E3D ideal. I wouldn't discount the H series out of hand. I think most of the problems have been pretty well worked out and the oil flow on the top end may even be superior to the D and E series. You may find a real good deal on one somewhere. There may be weight and mounting considerations though. Do your homework! The O320E3D will fit with no problems (other than the lack of space between the firewall and accessory case. A problem with all O320s). Another tip, if you want a spin on filter look at B&C Specialties oil filter adapter. It's very well done. Bob Misterka N342RM ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: COZY: Best 0-320 Choice? Author: Curt Smith at INTERNET Date: 8/6/97 4:50 PM I'm at the engine purchasing stage for my (III) project. I have the "standard" Brock 0-320 mount installed. The question is which 0-320's will work and which would be optimal? I assume any of the (dash) D's and E's will work as they all have the Dynafocal mount. Will all accept a fuel pump? What other considerations are relevant? I would, of course, prefer a 160 (the "D's"), but some of the E's have been converted to high compression pistons. I know the "H" is to be avoided, so I'm not even considering that option. I would appreciate any relevant thoughts and advice. Curt Smith From: cvlv@smarty.Telcel.net.ve Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 17:33:24 Subject: COZY: COZY TWIN > > At the Oshkosh Cozy forum Nat concluded with a last minute special: He > announced, with glee in his voice, that there had been an announcement > on the net to the effect of "the guys in Venezuela had abandoned their > twin engined coaxial prop Cozy and were replacing this with a standard > aircraft engine". Is this true, or was this good old Nat up to his old > tricks again? > > Phillip Johnson >. NO, NO, NO !!! WRONG We just had problems with our valves. The engines are great. We are very happy with them and have NO future plans to change them AT ALL. REGARDS CARLOS LEON RUBEN LEON COZY MK IV (twin) YV 22X Varieze YV 11X Date: Fri, 8 Aug 1997 01:31:39 -0400 (EDT) From: Nigel Field Subject: Re: COZY: Did I miss an E-Mail At 10:52 PM 8/6/97 -0400, you wrote: > >I hope this was a Joke, Carlos and I have had some trouble with aviation >fuel (100-130) on the Suzuki valves, which we are changing. Other than >that, we are not changing anything else. We are going to use auto fuel >from now on. We are happy with our Cozy and have log 105 hours. We dont >know if the twin-coaxial configuration is the best, but our Vari-eze >gave us much trouble with a O-320 Lycomig that we dont have the jugment >to say wich configuration is best. Thats good news Ruben, thanks for the report. My Vari-eze is powered with a Subaru EA-81 now for 4.5 years and 360 Hrs with no valve problems at all. I burn 92 Octane auto fuel almost exclusively, indeed I go out of my way to get it on cross country flights as I don't want any lead in my engine or valve or plug problems. It is known to cook valves on short stroke high RPM engines like you have. I remember back when I was a dirt poor young fellow just in the airforce, for a short time I used 115/145 avgas in my old MGB and quickly burned the valves. Guess I deserved it, though at the time thought I was pretty smart in the way I collected it. The 0-235 Lyc that I replaced with the Subaru gave me lots of trouble also. It was toast after 650 Hrs following a major overhaul. My buddy flying a Long-eze has just experienced the same problems at 670 hrs and is now installing an EJ-22 Subaru. My Cozy project will also be EJ-22 powered as well as several others I am aware of. Don't listen to the guy who says it can't be done, just that he doesn't know how to do it so it must be bad. I think your coaxial twin Cozy is pretty terrific, hang in there. Hope you get the valve problems all sorted out, but almost certainly its from the fuel. Please keep us posted. Best regard, Nigel Field Subaru Vari-eze Liquid cooled From: "Steve Campbell" Subject: COZY: Franklin Date: Sat, 9 Aug 1997 10:13:52 Fellow Builders, I got back from OSH (I couldn't go until Monday because a niece scheduled her wedding on that Saturday. Boy, talk about misplaced priorities.) I got a bit more information on the Franklin/Ivoprop that I thought I would share. To briefly recap, this 6 cylinder, 220 HP engine, allows you to use a light (20 lb) low cost (<2000) cockpit adjustable prop, however the engine weighs 351 lbs with all the standard accesories. I haven't begun looking for light weight accesories for the engine. Due to the smaller impulses of the 6 cylinder, the engine is smoother and quieter that a 360 and does not damage the Ivoprop blades and hub. 1) According to Pat at Atlas, the cost of the engine has come down somewhat, due to the current exchange rate of the dollar. It is now $10,700 without accessories, but this fluctuates with the exchange rate. If you pick up the engine, you can avoid any sales tax. Shipment is currently about 30 days ARO. 2) The engine already has 6 hours on it when shipped and does not need any break in procedures. 3) Velocity has been experimenting with this combination and have found that TO rolls can be halved, presumably compared to a fixed pitch cruise prop. They are reporting rate of climbs in excess of 2500 fpm. 4) Velocity solved the cooling issue by building a plenum that mounts on top of the engine. Cooling air is routed up to the plenum for a down draft across the engine. This eliminates most of the complex baffling that Nat used. 5) Ivo was showing a blade that went through a piece of Rotax engine when it disintegrated. Aside from paint chipping the blade was largely undamaged, while the exhaust pipe from the engine was bent in half. These blades, which are constructed primarily from uni, seem incredibly strong. The Velocity rep was enthusiastic about the combination and tells me that a number of their builders are opting for it. If you have the money, and recall here that mid time 360's are running about 10 k$ themselves, and are willing to tolerate the weight, this seems to be a really nice package. Regards Steve From: N11TE@aol.com Date: Sat, 9 Aug 1997 12:02:30 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Franklin I also, Steve, spent quite a bit of time at Oshkosh trying to get the true story on the IVO props. There is nothing I want more than a light weight variable pitch prop. There was a Velocity with a variable IVO prop parked down by the canard area that is owned by a lawyer (?). I talked to him for quite a while and he stated that the IVO prop was a good idea in work but not there yet. He stated he would not put his wife and child in the plane at this point. He said he had to cut off 1-1/2 in. from each of the three blades before it would begin to run right. Also, I heard second hand of a new IVO prop that was just tested on a 200 hp, 4-cyl Cozy MK IV. He said that it gave him tremendous acceleration and that it seemed to work well as long as it had a load on it. But, when he unloaded the prop quickly it made very uncomfortable vibrations. So he immediately took it off and sent it back. Just input for your consideration. I really enjoyed flying up in Jeff's AeroCanard. Now I know why I'm building what I am. I also enjoyed standing out by the plane and meeting enterested builders while Jeff and his dad ran the composite workshop. You probably are also not aware of what the EAA will do for you FREE if you find the right person to ask. Jeff had complete professional pictures taken of the plane while parked, had videotape shot (including interview) and a complete flying photoshoot with both still and video... over an hour of taking flying pictures. I was lucky enough to go along as "ballast." Then the next day a professional test pilot spent 2 flying hours wringing out the AeroCanard. Unfortunately, the test pilot became the "ballast" for this flight and I didn't get to go along. Can't wait for the story and pictures in Sport Aviation. Plus, they will sent all the pictures and video to Jeff for him to use as he wishes. All FREE... what a deal! Tom Ellis Cozy MK IV plans #25 now AeroCanard 540 N11TE@aol.com From: Pmsunset@aol.com Date: Sat, 9 Aug 1997 13:35:45 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Franklin >From : Steve Campbell... In a message dated 97-08-09 11:27:07 EDT, you write: << Fellow Builders, I got back from OSH (I couldn't go until Monday because a niece scheduled her wedding on that Saturday. Boy, talk about misplaced priorities.) I got a bit more information on the Franklin/Ivoprop that I thought I would share. To briefly recap, this 6 cylinder, 220 HP engine, allows you to use a light (20 lb) low cost (<2000) cockpit adjustable prop, however the engine weighs 351 lbs with all the standard accesories. I haven't begun looking for light weight accesories for the engine. Due to the smaller impulses of the 6 cylinder, the engine is smoother and quieter that a 360 and does not damage the Ivoprop blades and hub. >> I talked to an IA/A&P friend of mine on the bus on the way home from Osh about Franklin engines.....His reply was that he was scared of'em because he had seen too many of them w/connecting rods sticking thru the case.....He felt the connecting rods were much too small.........ie the weak link in the engine.....Anyone else heard this? I've flown behind them before and found them to be smooth running engines... Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 17:58:02 -0400 From: Alpha Computer Systems Subject: COZY: Powersport Rotary Engines Did anyone in the group go to a forum at Oshgosh 97 about the status of the Powersport Rotary engine development? Everett Hatch, Steve Beckham, and Alan Tolle have presented their trial, tribulations and sucesses at the forum in past years. I saw the article about the race at Sun-N-Fun and the loss of the bearing by Alan Tolle in his RV-4. The Mazda seems to have the most promise of any auto engine I have seen for Cozys. I was very impressed with the above mentioned men and the knowledge and approach to the problems with this engine, especially with problems of vibration. Can anyone speak about this engine and the progress that is being made? Does Powersport have a web site? Jim Brewer Albemarle, NC From: Marc Zeitlin Date: Wed, 20 Aug 97 10:49:18 EDT Subject: Re: COZY: Powersport Rotary Engines Jim Brewer asks: >Did anyone in the group go to a forum at Oshgosh 97 about the status of >the Powersport Rotary engine development? In the fine tradition of the internet, I won't answer your question, but I'll throw some other info at you :-). >........ The Mazda seems >to have the most promise of any auto engine I have seen for Cozys. While I agree that it has promise as an auto conversion, there are other conversions (Subaru, specifically) that I think are at least as promising, and a bit cheaper. The Eggenfellner (in N.H.) 2.5L conversion (165 HP per Subaru specs) goes for ~$10K, while the Stratus (in Washington, I think) 2.2L conversion (180 HP on a dyno) goes for ~$13K, both with PSRU's. If I remember correctly, the 200 HP Powersport was in the neighborhood of ~$16K. All three could take the Ivo Magnum cockpit adjustable prop, which would be a very nice combo. Build any one of the three yourself, and maybe you could do it for ~$6K. >......... I >was very impressed with the above mentioned men and the knowledge and >approach to the problems with this engine, especially with problems of >vibration. Agreed. >...... Can anyone speak about this engine and the progress that is >being made? Not me - hopefully someone else can chime in. >....... Does Powersport have a web site? Not that I could find in a 10 minute web search. -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com From: Carlos Le\sn Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 17:45:27 Subject: COZY: cozy twin aviation fuel We have recently found that the reason our valves got damaged was the use of aviation fuel for the following reasons: -Aviation fuel in Venezuela (AVGAS 100/130 green) is very dry...it does not contain any oily substances. -95 octane leaded auto fuel used here seems to have some additives to lubricate valves and other engine parts. -A high octane rating did not seem to have any effect on our valves since we had problems with both intake and exhaust valves. We made the an experiment (85 Degrees F hangar temperature): On a shiny surface we spilled aviation fuel. We found that it evaporated in about 30 seconds leaving NO residues at all. On another similar surface we spilled 95 octane leaded. After 3 minutes we could still feel a slippery substance remaining which would dry but still be there after 2 hours. WHAT IS THIS SUBSTANCE ? CAN ANYONE DO A SIMILAR TEST WITH U.S. AVIATION FUEL ? WE WOULD REALLY APREATIATE ANY HELP. REGARDS Carlos Leon COZY MK IV - YV 22X Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 14:44:37 -0400 (EDT) From: "George A. Graham" Subject: Re: COZY: Powersport Rotary Engines > >........ The Mazda seems > >to have the most promise of any auto engine I have seen for Cozys. > > While I agree that it has promise as an auto conversion, there are other > conversions (Subaru, specifically) that I think are at least as > promising, and a bit cheaper. The Eggenfellner (in N.H.) 2.5L conversion > (165 HP per Subaru specs) goes for ~$10K, while the Stratus (in > Washington, I think) 2.2L conversion (180 HP on a dyno) goes for ~$13K, > both with PSRU's. If I remember correctly, the 200 HP Powersport was in > the neighborhood of ~$16K. All three could take the Ivo Magnum cockpit > adjustable prop, which would be a very nice combo. > > Build any one of the three yourself, and maybe you could do it for ~$6K. Maybe 6K cash outlay, however it will add at least 6 mo of work and you end up with an unproven high risk design. I'm doing it, myself with a Mazda Rotary in a Eracer (pusher canard). I think it would be foolish to attempt converting an auto engine unless you are a motorhead to begin with. Personally, I started building engines before I was old enough to drive, and spent years as the crew chief for a Datsun Racing Team. Still, this is one hell of a project ! In my opinion, why buy a conversion for over 10K ? If you've got that kind of money, get a Lycoming - nodoubt - hands down - listen to Nat. You just bolt it in and fly, the cowl fits, the mount fits, the exhaust fits, the cables, the airbox , the starter etc. etc. etc. There are a few flying Mazda rotaries with whom I communicate. All have suffered the same pains of developing new everything. Tracy Crook sells a good booklet on converting one, but there is a tremendous amount of fabrication to do, and for what ? The mazda puts out about 150 hp stock, and burns about the same fuel at cruise - 7 to 9 gph @ 75%. You can port it to put out 200 hp, but then it consumes much more fuel. If, building an airplane from scratch/plans is not enough of a challenge for you, then welcome aboard ! This endeavor is for those who enjoy doing everything the hard way. The Powersport people are really sharp, with tons of money and equipment. They have been working at this almost 20 years and still have troubles. The Subaru Legacy motor has the same problems, unless you buy a firewall fwd package, you'll have only a new project, not an airplane motor, if you do buy a package, chances are you could've bought an airplane motor and been up flying. Those of us who willingly go down this path, do so because something bad happened with our Lycoming, and we would rather sit on the ground than fly with one again. Whew ! got that off my chest. George Graham Modified Eracer #206 (716) 874-3277 ca266@freenet.buffalo.edu From: "Richard W. Roberts" Subject: RE: COZY: cozy twin aviation fuel Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 11:37:32 -0700 Hi Carlos, I've done such a test about 2 years ago and the results were the same. = Nearly immediate evaporation to no residue for both 100LL and 80/87 = Avgas. The 80/87 did leave a slight residue after several tries which = was the red dye in the fuel. Slight is defined as red smudge left on a = white wiping rag. The 100LL did not leave a blue residue. Obviously = blue dye is more volatile. Rick Roberts -----Original Message----- From: Carlos Lesn [SMTP:services@argonaut.net] Sent: Monday, January 20, 1997 9:45 AM To: cozy forum Subject: COZY: cozy twin aviation fuel We have recently found that the reason our valves got damaged was the use of aviation fuel for the following reasons: -Aviation fuel in Venezuela (AVGAS 100/130 green) is very dry...it does not contain any oily substances. -95 octane leaded auto fuel used here seems to have some additives to lubricate valves and other engine parts. -A high octane rating did not seem to have any effect on our valves since we had problems with both intake and exhaust valves. We made the an experiment (85 Degrees F hangar temperature): =20 On a shiny surface we spilled aviation fuel. We found that it=20 evaporated in about 30 seconds leaving NO residues at all. On another similar surface we spilled 95 octane leaded. After 3=20 minutes we could still feel a slippery substance remaining which would dry but still be there after 2 hours. WHAT IS THIS SUBSTANCE ? CAN ANYONE DO A SIMILAR TEST WITH U.S. AVIATION FUEL ? WE WOULD REALLY APREATIATE ANY HELP. REGARDS Carlos Leon COZY MK IV - YV 22X=20 by x9.boston.juno.com (queuemail) id QmH23621; Fri, 22 Aug 1997 16:39:24 EDT Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 20:20:08 -0400 Subject: COZY: Engine Preservation From: unick@juno.com (Nick Ugolini) I just purchased a O-320 for my cozy. It will have to be in layup for the next few years. What specific method would I use to preserve it for the future? Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 18:08:10 -0700 From: Mahan Subject: Re: COZY: Engine Preservation The *best* thing to do is take off the mags, fill up the cylinders with oil, and lower it into an oil bath. Fred in Florida Nick Ugolini wrote: > > I just purchased a O-320 for my cozy. It will have to be in layup for > the next few years. What specific method would I use to preserve it for > the future? From: MISTER@neesnet.com Date: Mon, 25 Aug 97 12:24:59 EST Subject: Re: COZY: Engine Preservation Sacramento Sky Ranch has an article about preserving engines in storage. John Schwaner at SkyRanch is a very knowledgeable and helpful guy. The information can be seen on the web at http://www.sierra.net:80/skyranch/preserve.htm Bob Misterka N342RM ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: COZY: Engine Preservation Author: unick@juno.com (Nick Ugolini) at INTERNET Date: 8/22/97 5:15 PM I just purchased a O-320 for my cozy. It will have to be in layup for the next few years. What specific method would I use to preserve it for the future? by InfoAve.Net (PMDF V5.1-8 #23426) with SMTP id <01IMV4JOY5NG91MEN3@InfoAve.Net> for cozy_builders@hpwarhw.an.hp.com; Mon, 25 Aug 1997 17:10:16 EDT Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 17:09:51 -0400 From: Jeff S Russell Subject: COZY: IO-360 engine question? Organization: AEROCAD INC. Those of you that have engine knowledge I need some help. I am not a engine pro. Some history on my engine: TTSMO 156 hours crome cylinders 37 hours TT before we purchased stock bendex fuel injection but longer lines from the divider at the accessory case. up draft cooling from arm pits I had sticky exhaust valves to start with because of no valve guide clearance, that has been fixed by reaming to correct size by Bill Scott at Rough River KY. So what's the problem? before Oshkosh this engine from when I first installed it never has stop using oil. It started out using 2 qts per hour. I am now down to 1 qt per 2 hours. I tried using mineral oil again before I left to Oshkosh and during our trip at our 2nd leg at gross it went from a oil temp that had always been about 190-205 to 220-230. I also had a hot cylinder #2 go to over 400 degrees where its not been a problem in the past. So I thought it might be the weight I was lifting as a load on the engine. I could keep things in a OK temp as long as I did not lean as I normally did. Keeping the EGT at 1350 or below would keep #2 at 430 or less. When we flew home after dropping Tom off the temps staid the same as at gross. I then went this weekend to Griffin Ga. to a work shop by my self at light loading and flying at 10,000+ at 50 degrees I still had 225 oil temps? and 425 temps on #2 at 1350 EGT. by the way I have 4 CHT and 4 EGT scanner and fuel flow. when letting down and getting at 3000 ft at the same RPM at 10,000 and EGT the oil temp went to 205 and leveled off there for 20 minuets. I thought that was because of the let down :-) When leaving I added oil as normal and left heavier because I picked up stuff that I sent back with Alexander from the EAA workshop. The back seat was FULL. I took off and went to 10,500 and ran about 2500 RPM instead of 2450 coming and saw the oil temps not go over 207 and settle at 205. I then leaned to peak at approx. 1450 and never saw #2 go over 400. It was the same out side temps as before. Go figure. What is going on with what I have, or am I doing something wrong. This engine is back to what I am use to in temps on CHT and Oil. I like things to stay the same but don't understand why I had this happen. Thanks your giving me some clues on this. -- Jeff Russell/AeroCad Inc. E-mail: Jeff@aerocad.com Phone/ fax (call first): 910-961-2238 AeroCad: http://www.aerocad.com Composite workshop info: http://www.Sportair.com by InfoAve.Net (PMDF V5.1-8 #23426) with SMTP id <01IMWJ04FQYA8ZRMBY@InfoAve.Net> for cozy_builders@hpwarhw.an.hp.com; Tue, 26 Aug 1997 17:15:10 EDT Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 17:14:33 -0400 From: Jeff S Russell Subject: Re: COZY: IO-360 engine question? Organization: AEROCAD INC. bockscar@charlotte.infi.net wrote: > it is not unheard of for chrome cylinders to take up to 50 hours > for the rings to seat. If the problem has gone away, it sounds like > the rings have seated on all four cylinders. That one cylinder that > was giving the high temp may have been the last cylinder to seat. > What is your oil consumtion now? still about the 1 qt. per 2 hours > the only fix at this point, is the pull all four cylinders and > have them re-honned. Oil is still cheeper then that at this point. It seems to be getting better oil burn the longer I fly the engine. Is that going to be OK to keep trying to break it in. > If cooling is inadequit, the oil on the cylinder walls will cook and > varnish the cylinder walls and the engine will never seat properly and > will allways be an oil burner. I did not have the chance to break this one in :-) > The high temp you mentioned could be caused by a partially clogged > fuel injector, that may have later un-clogged, or the rings having > not seated on that cylinder At Oshkosh I removed ALL of the injectors and soaked them in MEK in an utrasound bath and installed them in a different order so #2 had a different one. This was not any help with the high oil or cyl temps. > or lack of cooling air through this cylinders cooling fins. Make sure all > inter-cylinder baffles are in good shape and positioned correctly, and > that there are no big leaks in the engines baffleing. All checked on the engine baffle OK. I will keep trying to find what is going on. Thanks for the responces -- Jeff Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 08:55:23 -0400 From: David Domeier Subject: Re: COZY: IO-360 engine question? Jeff, Sounds like your engine fixed itself, except for the unusualy high oil consumption. The excessive oil comsumption of the engine is probably caused by worn rings unless there is oil leaking somewhere else. OK. So if your oil loss is around the rings, how come it=92s happening on a recently overhauled engine? It could be because the wrong rings were installed or the engine did not break in properly. You most certainly have a problem in the cylinder itself. The high CHT on #2 is caused by lack of equal cooling air or a much worse ring problem than the other cylinders. It could be the problem in total if it=92s rings have failed. Just my humble opinion. I=92d pull #2 and see what there is to see. dd by InfoAve.Net (PMDF V5.1-8 #23426) with SMTP id <01IMYXX32U0891OAB1@InfoAve.Net> for cozy_builders@hpwarhw.an.hp.com; Thu, 28 Aug 1997 10:44:14 EDT Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 10:43:09 -0400 From: Jeff S Russell Subject: Re: COZY: IO-360 engine question? Organization: AEROCAD INC. David Domeier wrote: > Sounds like your engine fixed itself, except for the unusualy high oil > consumption. The excessive oil comsumption of the engine is probably=20 > caused by worn rings unless there is oil leaking somewhere else.=20 > OK. So if your oil loss is around the rings, how come it=92s happening > on a recently overhauled engine?=20 > It could be because the wrong rings were installed or the engine did > not break in properly. You most certainly have a problem in the > cylinder itself.=20 > The high CHT on #2 is caused by lack of equal cooling air or a much > worse ring problem than the other cylinders. It could be the problem i= n > total if it=92s rings have failed.=20 > Just my humble opinion. I=92d pull #2 and see what there is to see. #2 has been off and a valve job done twice. I forgot to tell that I only have 1 mag and Jeff Rose's electronic on the lower plugs. I have been told the lead wires could be the problem. Breaking down wires or 2 dregree advance timing every 1000 feet could cause heat? What do you=20 think. I will call Jeff R. next to see what news he will bring. We will keep trying. Thanks --=20 Jeff From: "Richard W. Roberts" Subject: RE: COZY: IO-360 engine question? Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 08:14:28 -0700 I've heard of the electronic ignitions causing a heat problem due to = more complete burning of the fuel. I wonder if your MAP sensor is going = funky? The leads are also a real possibility, but that problem is = typically allowing the spark to short through the insulation and = reducing spark. Mmmmm? Let us know what Jeff Rose says. Rick -----Original Message----- From: Jeff S Russell [SMTP:JRAEROCAD@yadtel.net] Sent: Thursday, August 28, 1997 7:43 AM To: cozybuilders Subject: Re: COZY: IO-360 engine question? David Domeier wrote: > Sounds like your engine fixed itself, except for the unusualy high oil > consumption. The excessive oil comsumption of the engine is probably=20 > caused by worn rings unless there is oil leaking somewhere else.=20 > OK. So if your oil loss is around the rings, how come it's happening > on a recently overhauled engine?=20 > It could be because the wrong rings were installed or the engine did > not break in properly. You most certainly have a problem in the > cylinder itself.=20 > The high CHT on #2 is caused by lack of equal cooling air or a much > worse ring problem than the other cylinders. It could be the problem = in > total if it's rings have failed.=20 > Just my humble opinion. I'd pull #2 and see what there is to see. #2 has been off and a valve job done twice. I forgot to tell that I only have 1 mag and Jeff Rose's electronic on the lower plugs. I have been told the lead wires could be the problem. Breaking down wires or 2 dregree advance timing every 1000 feet could cause heat? What do you=20 think. I will call Jeff R. next to see what news he will bring. We will keep trying. Thanks --=20 Jeff Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 14:48:28 -0400 From: David Domeier Subject: Re: COZY: IO-360 engine question? Jeff, re "I forgot to tell that I only have 1 mag and Jeff Rose's electronic on the lower plugs. I have been told the lead wires could be the problem." There are many guys successfully using Jeff Rose's electronic ignition and it would be a surprise is it were causing the problem. I still think the cylinder has a ring problem. Have you read any of the stuff by ECI on rings and chrome cylinders? dd by m5.boston.juno.com (queuemail) id HKD04896; Mon, 01 Sep 1997 07:46:40 EDT Subject: COZY: Engine Break-in procedure From: mbeduhn@juno.com (Mark W Beduhn) Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 07:46:40 EDT I have a rebuilt Lycoming 180 hp IO-360 with: chrome cylinders, Bendix fuel injection system, electronic/mag ignition, and an engine preoiler. I am getting ready to start the engine to do my taxi tests, but don't know what oil to use, and how to break in the engine. Does anyone out there have any suggestions? Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 08:12:36 -0700 From: Rick and Adele Roberts Subject: Re: COZY: Engine Break-in procedure This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------957A8A7AB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mark W Beduhn wrote: > > I have a rebuilt Lycoming 180 hp IO-360 with: chrome cylinders, Bendix > fuel injection system, electronic/mag ignition, and an engine preoiler. > I am getting ready to start the engine to do my taxi tests, but don't > know what oil to use, and how to break in the engine. Does anyone out > there have any suggestions? Hi Mark and All, I scanned the following short document from the Lycoming Flyer Key Reprints. Hope it helps. Rick --------------957A8A7AB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="engine break in.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="engine break in.txt" Hard Facts About Engine Break-In Most people seem to operate on the philosophy that they can best get their money's worth from any mechanical device by treating it with great care. This is probably true, but in many cases it is necessary to interpret what great care really means. This is particularly applicable when considering the break-in of a modern, reciprocating aircraft engine. Aircraft owners frequently ask about the proper procedures for run-in of a new or remanufactured engine so they can carefully complete the required steps. Many of these recommended break-in procedures also apply to engines which have been overhauled or had a cylinder replaced. The first careful consideration for engine run-in is the oil to be used. The latest revision of Textron Lycoming Service Instruction 1014 should be consulted for this information. The basic rule which applies to most normally aspirated Lycoming piston engines is simple; use straight mineral oil of the proper viscosity for the first fifty hours or until oil consumption stabilizes. Then switch to ashless dispersant (AD) oil. The exceptions to the basic rule above are the 0-320-H and the O/LO-360-E series. These engines may be operated using either straight mineral oil or ashless dispersant oil, however, if the engine is delivered with ashless dispersant oil installed, it must remain on ashless dispersant oil. The Textron Lycoming oil additive P/N LW-16702 must be added to the 0-320-H and O/LO-360-E engines at airframe installation, and every 50 hours thereafter or at every oil change. An FAA-approved lubricating oil that contains, in the proper amount, an oil additive equivalent to LW-16702 will meet the requirements for the additive as stated in Lycoming Service Instruction No. 1014M. All Lycoming turbocharged engines must be broken in with ashless dispersant oil only. When taking delivery of a new aircraft, there is another point which must be emphasized. Some aircraft manufacturers add approved preservative lubricating oil to protect new engines from rust and corrosion at the time the aircraft leaves the factory. This preservative oil must be removed by the end of the first 25 hours of operation. Each new or remanufactured engine is given a production test run at the factory before the engine is delivered to an aircraft manufacturer or other customer. After installation in the aircraft, the engine is run again during the test flights. These test runs will insure that the engine is operating normally and will provide an opportunity to locate small oil leaks or other minor discrepancies. In addition, these test runs do the initial seating of the piston rings. The rest of the break-in is the responsibility of the pilot who flies the aircraft during the next 50 hours. A new, remanufactured, or overhauled engine should receive the same start, warm-up, and preflight checks as any other engine. There are some aircraft owners and pilots who would prefer to use low power settings for cruise during the break-in period. This is not recommended. A good break-in requires that the piston rings expand sufficiently to seat with the cylinder walls during the engine break-in period. This seating of the ring with the cylinder wall will only occur when pressures inside the cylinder are great enough to cause expansion of the piston rings. Pressures in the cylinder only become great enough for a good break-in when power settings above 65% are used. Full power for takeoff and climb during the break-in period is not harmful; it is beneficial, although engine temperatures should be monitored closely to insure that overheating does not occur. Cruise power settings above 65%, and preferably in the 70% to 75% of rated power range should be used to achieve a good engine break-in. It should be remembered that if the new or remanufactured engine is normally aspirated (nonturbocharged), it will be necessary to cruise at the lower altitudes to obtain the required cruise power levels. Density altitudes in excess of 8000 feet (5000 feet is recommended) will not allow the engine to develop sufficient cruise power for a good break-in. For those who still think that running the engine hard during break-in falls into the category of cruel and unusual punishment, there is one more argument for high power settings during engine break-in. The use of low power settings does not expand the piston rings enough, and a film of oil is left on the cylinder walls. The high temperatures in the combustion chamber will oxidize this oil film so that it creates a condition commonly known as glazing of the cylinder walls. When this happens, the ring break-in process stops, and excessive oil consumption frequently occurs. The bad news is that extensive glazing can only be corrected by removing the cylinders and rehoning the walls. This is expensive, and it is an expense that can be avoided by proper break in procedures. To summarize, there are just a few items to remember about engine break-in: (1) If a preservative oil has been added by the aircraft manufacturer, drain it not later than the first 25 hours of operation; (2) Follow the engine manufacturers recommendation regarding the oil to be used for break-in and the period between changes; (3) Run the engine at high cruise power levels for best piston ring/cylinder wall mating; (4) Continue break in operation for 50 hours or until oil consumption stabilizes. These simple procedures should eliminate the possibility of cylinder wall glazing and should prepare the engine for a long and satisfactory service life. --------------957A8A7AB-- Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 17:39:59 -0800 From: Eric Westland Subject: Re: COZY: Engine Break-in procedure Mark W Beduhn wrote: > > I have a rebuilt Lycoming 180 hp IO-360 with: chrome cylinders, Bendix > fuel injection system, electronic/mag ignition, and an engine preoiler. > I am getting ready to start the engine to do my taxi tests, but don't > know what oil to use, and how to break in the engine. Does anyone out > there have any suggestions? Mark, Your break-in procedure will most likely depend on the chroming process that was applied to your cylinders. I would think that you would need to contact them for the proper proceedure, oil, etc. Lycoming to my knowledge, does not chrome cylinders when they overhaul, so their procedure may not apply, but I'm not sure. There is a good article on this at http://www.avweb.com/articles/breakin.html There is another on chrome jugs at http://www.avweb.com/articles/cylinder.html Some of this may or may not apply as you have both a new engine and airframe, so it's unlikely you will just jump in and fly, but it's a start. I hope it helps. Eric From: "mel" Subject: Re: COZY: Engines for experimental aircraft Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 08:20:38 -0400 my .02 worth. if youre going to spend 14,500 for non cert. why not just call lycoming and get a factory reman. they are about that price, arent they? norm & monda cozy IV #202 ---------- > From: ponciroli@postoffice.worldnet.att.net > To: Cozy MK-IV Builders > Subject: COZY: Engines for experimental aircraft > Date: Wednesday, September 03, 1997 9:06 AM > > Greetings to all: > > I have been looking for a Lycoming engine for my plane for nearly two years > and have repeatedly been a day late. However, while I was at Oshkosh, I > found an engine remanufaturer that is assembling Lycoming engines for use > in experimental aircraft. The engines are non certified which means that > the tracability of parts is non existant. > > The engines are fitted out with a new crank shaft and crank case out of > ECI, a new carburator from Precision Air Motor, new fuel pump, new slick > mags, rebuilt carburator and reconditioned jugs, your choice of cerminal, > steel and one other choice, a new sky tech light weight starter and 40 Amp > alternator. The price is $14,500. > > The outfit is Aero Sport Power out of Kamloops British Columbia. The > Telephone number is (250) 376-2955, The market line is non certified > aircraft engines and is headed up by Bart Lalonde and Bob Schneider. I > believe that the company does other aircraft engine work as well. > > I introduced Nat Puffer to the Bart and Bob and he seemed to be impressed > with what they offered. > > I hope that this helps those of you that are in the search for an 0-360 > power plant. > From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: Re: COZY: Engines for experimental aircraft (fwd) Date: Wed, 3 Sep 97 11:34:18 EDT Don Ponciroli wrote; >> The engines are fitted out with a new crank shaft and crank case out of >> ECI, a new carburator from Precision Air Motor, new fuel pump, new slick >> mags, rebuilt carburator and reconditioned jugs, your choice of cerminal, >> steel and one other choice, a new sky tech light weight starter and 40 Amp >> alternator. The price is $14,500. They would also build up motors with other starters (Magnaflite or BC) and leave off one or both of the mags and the carb if you so desired (to put a Electronic Ignition and/or Ellison TB on) for a concomitant reduction in price. >> The outfit is Aero Sport Power out of Kamloops British Columbia. The >> Telephone number is (250) 376-2955..... headed up by Bart Lalonde..... I had a 30 - 45 minute discussion with Bart. He's a very nice guy and seemed to know his stuff. Seems like a truly tantalizing possibility.... >> I believe that the company does other aircraft engine work as well. Yes, their main business is rebuilding certified engines - Bart used to do this in his home but had too much business, so he made it official. Norm Doty wrote; >my .02 worth. if youre going to spend 14,500 for non cert. why not just >call lycoming and get a factory reman. they are about that price, arent >they? I thought that remans were running around $17K, not including new cranks or case. I may very well be wrong - can't get to VanBortel's web page today. -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com by m5.boston.juno.com (queuemail) id UTL17962; Wed, 03 Sep 1997 20:26:30 EDT Subject: Re: COZY: Engine Break-in procedure From: mbeduhn@juno.com (Mark W Beduhn) Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1997 20:26:30 EDT On Mon, 01 Sep 1997 08:41:00 +0000 Robert Eeg writes: >Mark W Beduhn wrote: >> >> I have a rebuilt Lycoming 180 hp IO-360 with: chrome cylinders, >Bendix >> fuel injection system, electronic/mag ignition, and an engine >preoiler. >> I am getting ready to start the engine to do my taxi tests, but >don't >> know what oil to use, and how to break in the engine. Does anyone >out >> there have any suggestions?Mark >If the engine has NEVER run I would remove the cowling and >install LARGE scoop baffles(like they use in the test cells at >engine manufactures) and a 4 blade wooden "club prop" (tractor, not >pusher)(forget the taxi tests for a few hours)and run the engine as in >a test cell. Use 50wt Non-detergent oil.(if you use detergent oil >you could varnish the chrome cylinders and prevent a proper >"break-in") >Follow Lycomings run-in schedule of running the engine at different >rpms and checking oil consumption by weighing the oil after a period >of time to verify that the "rings" have seated properly. >These procedures normally would be bypassed in a production or flight >proven aircraft. In that case we would run the engine for not more >than >30 minutes (total) to check for oil preasure and leaks etc and then >cowl'er up and Fly for 1 hour (staying close to the airport). This >gives plenty of cooling and after a while you can actually see the >cylinder head temps drop as the rings seat into the cylinders. The >trouble with chrome cylinders is the piston rings are made of cast >iron >and the cylinders are hard chrome. The rings are weak and they wear to >conform to the cylinder wall. The chrome cylinders have a 'slight' >cross-hatch or porious pattern(slightly like sand paper)to wear down >the cast iron piston rings. If you overheat the chrome cylinder it >some >times bakes a "glaze" onto the cylinder wall.(very slippery) This >glaze >or varnish PREVENTS the cast iron rings from seating properly and you >end up with an oil burner. Good compression,(because oil is a good >seal) >but a oil burner just the same. >The problem with taxi tests in your pusher aircraft is while your out >taxiing around your chrome engine won't have a chance to break in and >WILL overheat. >This is less of a problem with a normal engine with steel cylinders >and >chrome rings.(just the opposite of your engine) The steel cylinder is >the weaker metal and is usually 'machine honed' with deep cross-hatch >pattern. The chrome piston rings (being the harder metal) "cut" their >way into the cross-hatch pattern very quickly and seat nicely. If a >steel cylinder has a problem and doesn't seat for some reason its >fairly >simple to remove the cylinder and "re-hone" it for another try. >This CANNOT be done with a Chrome Cylinder. You can't hone Chrome, it >comes from the chromer with a 'weak pattern' already in it. This is >why it sometimes takes 100 hours to break in a chrome engine.(no joke, >but the chrome cylinder people won't fess up to that) While a normal >steel engine breaks-in in say 5 hours.(on a normal steel engine use >non-detergent oil for at least 25 hours and if its burning oil add >another 25 hours). >Good luck and keep us informed. >Bob > From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 19:27:14 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Engines for experimental aircraft (fwd) I have a 5 year old Sky-tec starter, that could use a new motor field winding/case. Sky-tec will not furnish parts for it!. Use a B & C where you will be able to get parts. From: Chm12345@aol.com Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 21:09:57 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Thanks for the subscription Dear Marc, I work for a company called Symbiosis in Miami, Fl. We were bought a year ago by Boston Scientific Corporation. We manufacture disposable biopsy forceps and laparoscopic instruments. I work in the automation department designing automated manufacturing equipment for in house use. Thanks a lot for the subscription and I look forward to the COZY experience. I will sure mention your page to Nat since I think you did a great job with it. By the way, how's your plane?. Are your pictures up to date? Chris From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: Re: COZY: Engines for experimental aircraft (fwd) Date: Thu, 4 Sep 97 9:16:36 EDT Carl Denk writes: >When I'm going to put my ### on the line, I'm not going to go with a non- >certified engine! >....... By Proper, I mean every part is >traceable, with a yellow tag, work order number, or new with a bill of >sale. According to Bart Lalonde (ref: discussion at Oshkosh), all the parts that he uses to build his engines are yellow tagged. He builds "non-certified" engines, but he claims to use all "certified" yellow-tagged parts. This should allay Carl's (absolutely justified) concerns. -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com From: "mel" Subject: Re: COZY: Engines for experimental aircraft (fwd) Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 17:20:47 -0400 well if he usses all yellow tagged parts, and is a certified station then shouldent the engines be certified? he must be cutting corners some where or he would certify the engines, after all a certified engine commands a higher price. my $ .02 norm & monda cozy IV #202 Ford V-6 powered ---------- > From: Marc J. Zeitlin > To: Cozy MK-IV Builders > Subject: Re: COZY: Engines for experimental aircraft (fwd) > Date: Thursday, September 04, 1997 9:16 AM > > Carl Denk writes: > > >When I'm going to put my ### on the line, I'm not going to go with a non- > >certified engine! > > >....... By Proper, I mean every part is > >traceable, with a yellow tag, work order number, or new with a bill of > >sale. > > According to Bart Lalonde (ref: discussion at Oshkosh), all the parts > that he uses to build his engines are yellow tagged. He builds > "non-certified" engines, but he claims to use all "certified" > yellow-tagged parts. This should allay Carl's (absolutely justified) > concerns. > > -- > Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com From: Rick Roberts Subject: RE: COZY: Engines for experimental aircraft (fwd) Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 14:29:41 -0700 Likely, it's an insurance issue. But if I was looking for an engine, = this guy was really bright and his work was beautiful, so I'd certainly = at least talk to him about why they aren't certified rather than just = speculation. Certified or not it's a good deal, and I'd really rather = not spend an extra 3K on an engine if I didn't need to. A lot of work = that I've seen coming out of certified shops scared the fecal material = out of me. Every time I'd have my 150 serviced by a certified A&P I'd = end up spending 8-10 hours fixing all of their work to bring it up to my = (and my partners) standards. E.g. bad safety wiring, brake fluid = leaking, etc... Rick Roberts -----Original Message----- From: mel [SMTP:norm.doty@worldnet.att.net] Sent: Thursday, September 04, 1997 2:21 PM To: Marc J. Zeitlin; Cozy MK-IV Builders Subject: Re: COZY: Engines for experimental aircraft (fwd) well if he usses all yellow tagged parts, and is a certified station = then shouldent the engines be certified? he must be cutting corners some where or he would certify the engines, after all a certified engine commands a higher price. my $ .02 norm & monda cozy IV #202 Ford V-6 powered ---------- > From: Marc J. Zeitlin > To: Cozy MK-IV Builders > Subject: Re: COZY: Engines for experimental aircraft (fwd) > Date: Thursday, September 04, 1997 9:16 AM >=20 > Carl Denk writes: >=20 > >When I'm going to put my ### on the line, I'm not going to go with a non- > >certified engine! >=20 > >....... By Proper, I mean every part is=20 > >traceable, with a yellow tag, work order number, or new with a bill = of=20 > >sale. >=20 > According to Bart Lalonde (ref: discussion at Oshkosh), all the parts > that he uses to build his engines are yellow tagged. He builds > "non-certified" engines, but he claims to use all "certified" > yellow-tagged parts. This should allay Carl's (absolutely justified) > concerns. >=20 > -- > Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: Re: COZY: Engines for experimental aircraft (fwd) Date: Thu, 4 Sep 97 17:38:03 EDT Norm Doty writes: >well if he usses all yellow tagged parts, and is a certified station then >shouldent the engines be certified? I have no clue - I just know what he told me. I'm not familiar enough (or at all) with what the FAA requires regarding "certifying" an engine, so I can't comment on that. I do know that as soon as you put an engine in a homebuilt it's immediately non-certified, but I understand that what you're saying is that it would be "functionally equivalent" to a certified engine although not actually certified. Maybe someone who knows more about engines and the FAA can comment. >he must be cutting corners some where or he would certify the engines, >after all a certified engine commands a higher price. I don't think we have enough information at this point to make that judgment. Maybe he's only certified in Canada and it costs a bundle to get certified in the US - maybe there's some other reason. It's all speculation at this point. Feel free to give him a call at the provided phone # and ask him - Bart's a nice guy and I'm sure he'll be perfectly willing to answer your questions. -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com From: wilhelmson@scra.org Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 18:45:07 -0400 Subject: Re[2]: COZY: Engines for experimental aircraft Where does ECI get the "new" cranks and cases? ECI rebuilds and refurbishes engine parts, but the last I heard there was only one source for new cranks (Lycoming). Superior has been working for three years to get a crank of their own certified. Many cranks are rejected for use in certified engines that on reinspection or rework (not approved process) can be used with some confidence. A "new" 0360 crank from Lycomng is over $6000. A run out engine with a certifiable crank and case is worth as much as a fresh overhauled one that uses a non certifiable crank and case. These two parts are the reason the engines cost so much. Superior Air parts recognizes this and that is why they are trying to provide second source new parts. I hope this information may help the builders understand the engine choice problem. Engine reliability is a function of many factors. But I have yet to hear about a engine failure caused by a broken yellow tag. Jack Wilhelmson N711CZ by m12.boston.juno.com (queuemail) id VbS21022; Thu, 04 Sep 1997 21:38:24 EDT Subject: Re: COZY: Engines for experimental aircraft (fwd) From: cozybldr@juno.com (Paul T Stowitts) Date: Thu, 04 Sep 1997 21:38:24 EDT On Thu, 4 Sep 97 17:38:03 EDT "Marc J. Zeitlin" writes: >Norm Doty writes: > >>well if he usses all yellow tagged parts, and is a certified station >then >>shouldent the engines be certified? > >I have no clue - I just know what he told me. I'm not familiar enough >(or at all) with what the FAA requires regarding "certifying" an >engine, >so I can't comment on that. I do know that as soon as you put an >engine >in a homebuilt it's immediately non-certified, but I understand that >what >you're saying is that it would be "functionally equivalent" to a >certified engine although not actually certified. > >Maybe someone who knows more about engines and the FAA can comment. > >>he must be cutting corners some where or he would certify the >engines, >>after all a certified engine commands a higher price. > >I don't think we have enough information at this point to make that >judgment. Maybe he's only certified in Canada and it costs a bundle >to >get certified in the US - maybe there's some other reason. It's all >speculation at this point. Feel free to give him a call at the >provided >phone # and ask him - Bart's a nice guy and I'm sure he'll be >perfectly >willing to answer your questions. > >-- >Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com > I purchased a certified engine and I could have kept it a certified engine. I chose not to because 1) it was going on an experimental plane and 2) it could be made "better" by balancing, air flowing, porting & polishing, modifying the cam, using higher compression pistons, etc. Mnay of these items cannot be done to a certified engine. It all depends on what you want to do with it. BTW, a non-certified engine can be returned to certified condition. Hope this helps. Paul Stowitts Cozy Mark IV #200 by m5.boston.juno.com (queuemail) id VbO11833; Thu, 04 Sep 1997 21:54:55 EDT Subject: COZY: Engine Break-in From: mbeduhn@juno.com (Mark W Beduhn) Date: Thu, 04 Sep 1997 21:54:55 EDT Thanks for all of the responses and suggestions to my question about breaking in my engine. I got a line on a local Tech school who has several club props, and I will be talking to them tomorrow about borrowing one for a couple of weeks. If that doesn't pan out it sounds like it would be worth buying one to avoid damaging my $$$$ engine. Thanks again, I will let everyone know how it works out. Mark Beduhn N494CZ - I'm really close to flying! Date: Fri, 05 Sep 1997 08:01:22 -0400 From: David Domeier Subject: Re: COZY: Engines for experimental aircraft (fwd) Marc, According to my DAR, there is a change coming soon with regard to engines and experimental airplanes. For example, I have an 0-360-A4M which I have modified with a single point injection system and a Jeff Rose DIS. Under the new reg, I will have to get an "X" stamped on the data plate and it will stay there until the engine is brought back to the A4M specifications. dd From: SWrightFLY@aol.com Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 08:26:15 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: Re: COZY: Engines for experimental aircraft (fwd) I will have an empty weight of about 1000 lbs. and my Stager EZ is using Long-EZ wings. I feel the best combo for this will be a O-320 with a variable pitch prop. I am now shopping for an engine. I would appreciate all recommendations. Date: Fri, 05 Sep 1997 12:34:25 -0700 From: Eric Westland Subject: Re: COZY: Engine Break-in procedure Mark Beduhn wrote: > > Eric, > > I was not able to view the articles you list because a password is required. Could you please copy the text and send it to > me? > > Thanks, > > Mark Beduhn > > > > Your break-in procedure will most likely depend on the chroming process > that was applied to your cylinders. I would think that you would need > to contact them for the proper proceedure, oil, etc. Lycoming to my > knowledge, does not chrome cylinders when they overhaul, so their > procedure may not apply, but I'm not sure. > > There is a good article on this at > > http://www.avweb.com/articles/breakin.html > > There is another on chrome jugs at > > http://www.avweb.com/articles/cylinder.html > > Eric > > --------- End forwarded message ---------- ************* Sorry, did not think of that. I'd be happy to copy them for you, but they have pictures and I think you would like the real thing. Avweb is free, but you do have to join. It's worth doing as there is lots of good stuff there. To sign up, go to http://www.avweb.com/. If it does not work, please let me know and I'll get them to you. Enjoy, Eric Date: Fri, 05 Sep 1997 16:43:25 -0700 From: Mahan Subject: Re: COZY: Engines for experimental aircraft (fwd) My opinion -- forget the variable pitch prop, Steve. Other people with 1000 lb EZ's and O-320's get good performance. My fat 1000 lb O-235 powered long EZ performs decently. You'll spend more money, be buying problems and additional maintenance, and wil add an extra 25-45 lb in the rear where you don't need it, Fred in Florida SWrightFLY@aol.com wrote: > > I will have an empty weight of about 1000 lbs. and my Stager EZ is using > Long-EZ wings. I feel the best combo for this will be a O-320 with a variable > pitch prop. I am now shopping for an engine. I would appreciate all > recommendations. From: "mel" Subject: COZY: prop location Date: Mon, 15 Sep 1997 21:51:07 -0400 can anyone tell me where the prop flange is supposed to be located? ( yes i know. its in the rear ) ive got a friend who is going to use a mazda rotary, and hes asked me to make the engine mount for him. he is making the fixture for me all i have to do is cut and weld the metal, but we need to know where the prop flange should be in relation to the holes on the firewall. ---------- > From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com > To: AlWick@aol.com; cozy_builders@hpwarhw.an.hp.com > Subject: Re: COZY: Warning: potential builder problems > Date: Monday, September 15, 1997 8:14 PM > > On 09/15/97 14:14:05 you wrote: > > > >Spent a few hours visiting a builder doing the last of his taxi tests on > >canard. Learned a lot. > >Brake lines: the plastic lines have a brass insert that goes INSIDE the > tube. > >This is needed IN ADDITION to the normal brass compression fitting. This > >prevents air from being sucked in during hard braking. I misunderstood the > >warning about this in instructions. I thought Nat was just referring to the > >need for a compression fitting. Result: not enough stopping power. Ran off > >runway into grass. > > > >Engine Fire: He has fuel injected O360. Boost pump left on for more than 10 > >sec causes fuel to dump out of air intake. Collected in bottom of engine > >cowl. Caught fire. He also had leaking injector, not readily noticed. > >Recommend fuel drain on cowl bottom, add alum to cowl bottom, don't run > boost > >for more than few seconds. After fuel burned, fire source was epoxy. > >Remove injectors at corners of engine during install and ship. They easily > >get dented and may not show leak till after engine shut off. > >He was smart to have two fire extinguishers avail. Hops out and looks after > >start up of engine. No signif damage. > >Spark plug wire: chaffed on cooling baffling. Probably source for engine > >fire. > >Prop wipe out: hit a piece of fabric lying on runway. Any little thing on > >runway can wipe out prop. > >Just wanted to warn everyone. I place a lot of value on problems other > >builders have had. This guy is very cautious about fuel. Even then, in > sample > >you can see little flakes floating around. > >FWIW > >-al > >Ps. He's not member of list and I forgot to ask permission to post this. > But > >it's too important to not post. So will keep it anonomous. > > > > > > > > The real issue here is check, double check another day, and do it over > again. If at all possible have someone else looking over you shoulder > regularly. Be humble and ask for help, pay if necessary for an certified > mechanic or inspector to look at times. I am not talking of any offical > inspections, just friends looking out for your opposite of front side. Make > friends with the local aircraft repair facilities, buy some parts (a set of > sparkplugs, harness, etc) from them, it'll be a little higher cost, but you > will have someone to bounce questions off. Visit their facility frequently > and look a how a certified aircraft is made, wires and tubing routed and > fastened. I befriended an Aerostar repair station and the local maintenance > hanger. I poked my head everywhere it would fit, making a pleasant nuisance > of myself. I saw engine going off, accessories bing transfered, on; gear up > landings repaired, etc. > I am a educational nosy type person, you need to be if you build an > aircraft. This is a classic situation of even following the plans, having > problems. > > Re: Prop damage: Wheel pants should be on at all times to minimize prop > damage, and landing brake deployed whenever taxiing. I had damage the day > before the F.A.A. came. > > An injected engine with updraft engine, probably won't run right due to fuel > vaporizing in the little stainless lines. I mounted the distrubution block > on the prop governor pad. Airflow made special length tubing. > > AN injected will leak fuel frequently, and should be planned for! My engine > an IO-320-B1A from a twin commanche has the servo mounted forward (for us) > on the vertical face of the oil pan. If anything flows this way, every thing > is pitched to drain and drain holes properly located. The engine itself has > drain plugs on the bottom of the oil sump, to the induction area. On mine > their is a sniffle (check)valve located with tygon tubing to the outside. > This builder should hunt out his model engine installed on a certified > aircraft, talk to mechanics to determine how to handle the situation. > > I'll post in several days a book list of references that I found very > helpful, and the cost is minor compared to the cost of the plane. While > waiting for epoxy to cure, at work lunch, etc. read, understand. Evrything > from wiring details, material specs, and WHY things are done the way they > are. > > In the 2 weeks I have been on this mailing, I have spent more time trying to > keep people from having bad experiences, I would much rather spend the time > describing neat items I have done/seen. BUILD BY THE PLANS. Date: Mon, 15 Sep 1997 22:56:00 -0400 From: "Edmond A. Richards" Subject: COZY: prop location "mel" wrote, >we need to know where the prop flange should be in relation to the holes= on the firewall.< On my airplane the distance from the finished firewall (fiberfax + Al sheet) to the aft face of the prop extension is 39.2" as best I can measu= re it. The engine is mounted and all the baffling is in place so it's hard = to get a tape close to the flange. I used a long straight edge to project t= he flange position down and measured below the bottom, aft baffle to the firewall. I think it's pretty close. Hope this helps Ed Richards Cozy Mark IV #88 Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 13:16:34 -0700 From: "James J. Cullen, Ph.D." Subject: COZY: Engine Stories I've been trying -- unsuccessfully -- for the last 3 months to locate a suitable engine for my Mark IV. It's amazing how much junk there is out there and how many people are willing to price their junk sky high. It's equally amazing how buying a used aircraft engine is actually tackier than buying a car. Anyway, I'd like to solicit those in our group who have obtained their engines to tell us how they went about it. Where did you get your engine? What condition was it in? What accessories came with it? How much did you pay? What companies did you deal with? Who would you recommend? Who would you recommend that we stay away from? ...that sort of thing. It would be of great help to me and probably to others who have yet to go after their engines. Many thanks, Jim Cullen From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: COZY: Engine Stories (fwd) Date: Tue, 23 Sep 97 8:45:50 EDT Jim Cullen wrote; >Anyway, I'd like to solicit those in our group who have obtained their >engines to tell us how they went about it. Where did you get your engine? I'm in the process of buying an O-360-A4K from an individual who's got it on an aerobatic biplane and is going to replace it with a O-540. >What condition was it in? Seems pristine. It's got 1250 hours on it, compression is 75/80 or better in all cylinders, burns about 1 qt. every 8-9 hours, has full oil pressure at all RPM's, and has all original logs with it. He's kept in in certified condition, and as far as I can tell all AD's have been complied with. It's got a solid crank, so I don't have to worry about the hollow crank AD's. >..... What accessories came with it? Everything. Alternator, Starter, Mags, Carb, and after a bit of discussion, he threw in the Oil Cooler. I'll probably sell the starter, alternator, and carb, and replace them with lightweight ones and an Ellison. I might replace one of the mags with a EI system, as well. >..... How much did you pay? We've agreed on his asking price of $9750. He did a lot of research and found that that was a common price for an engine in that condition, and I used Core price (~$6K) + $5/hr for hours remaining till OH (700 hrs., by the time I take posession) to arrive at almost exactly the same #. >..... What companies did you deal with? Who would you recommend? Who >would you recommend that we stay away from? None, and no clue :-(. We've agreed to have the engine inspected by an A&P, and assuming that goes well, I'll take posession sometime in November, probably. I think I REALLY lucked out on this one, since I never even looked at anything else. I owe Eric Westland at least one beer, since he pointed this engine out to me as being for sale twice. Also, it's only a 1 hour drive away from me, so I can see it easily. -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com From: ponciroli@postoffice.worldnet.att.net Date: Thu, 25 Sep 1997 07:52:28 -0500 Subject: COZY: Engines Greetings to all, Jim Cullen recently asked where he could find and engine for his Cozy project. In a previous E-mail I mentioned that Areo SPort Power in Camloops BC Canada can provide a non-certified engine for $14,500 built to new specs. I'm sure that they can also build a certified reman engine for a sum greater than that, but considerably less expensive than Lycoming. Their phone number is (250) 376-2955. Don Ponciroli (860) 464-1158 Date: Thu, 25 Sep 1997 21:02:00 -0800 From: Eric Westland Subject: Re: COZY: Engine Stories (long) James J. Cullen, Ph.D. wrote: > > Anyway, I'd like to solicit those in our group who have obtained their > engines to tell us how they went about it... Several of you recently asked about engine resources, a subject I had started writing on last spring. So, I decided to finish this topic and share it with the rest of you in the hope it would help. It's a huge job unless you are just plunking down the cash for a new one, here goes. First, you need to decide which engine you are going to go with. I am limiting this post to Lycomings, so you can choose from a 150 HP O-320 up to a 200 HP IO-360. I started trying to find an O-360 so I could just follow the plans, but they are extremely difficult to find as this is the engine of choice for many homebuilders. I finally decided it probably would be more important to find a quality engine and combine it with a good prop, so I expanded my search to the above range. O-320's come in two flavors, 150 and 160 HP. They are basically the same engine, but if you want the 160 HP with a dynafocal mount, you are looking for an O-320-D series engine. Most of these come off high wing Cessnas, so the accessory case will need to be exchanged for one that has a provision for a mechanical fuel pump - not a big deal, but a necessary move. These engines however will also not have a surface machined for a prop gov., so if you go with a constant speed prop, it will have to be electrically adjustable as getting the case machined is difficult (expensive). After talking with two builders that are operating hydraulically adjustable props, they reported very good performance numbers, but the cost of these props new starts at around $7,500 and goes up to around $10,000 by the time you add shipping and the spinner. O-320's however run several thousand dollars less than O-360's, cost a little less to overhaul, weigh 10 pounds less and are much more available. Expect the CS prop however to weigh at least 33 pounds at the aft-most part of the plane. One good source I found from our list (Kevin I think) for runout O-320's was Bobby's Planes and Parts in Texas. He has many engines that are first run from Cessna conversions to 180 HP, so they have decent time on them, were flown often (less chance of corrosion) and he will swap the accessory case for you for free so you can put on the mechanical fuel pump. O-320-B's are $4,500 and O-320-D's are $5,500. Those are fair prices and he seems like a very fair fellow. I corresponded with several people that bought from him and they were all satisfied. His number is in the archives. O-360's There just is not much good news here. A first run core (probably the only kind you should consider) is generally $7,000 to $8,000 IF you can find one. Most of the salvage yards don't have one anyway, so you are left to hunt for single engines from private parties. Once you add the cost of an overhaul to the core price, you are probably better off buying an overhauled engine directly from Lycoming for about $16,000. It will have new cylinders, but the crank may be ground down to minimums, the cam is not new and there may be significant time on the crankcase. Of course, for three thousand more, you might be able to get a friend with a complete RV kit to buy one for you from Van's for about $19,600. You'll probably have to sell the carb, alternator and starter, but there is no cheaper way I know of to get a new O-360-A1A. Don't forget to add freight and sales tax if your state has a sales tax. The overhaulers are getting driven out of business by Lycoming. As high as these overhauled engine prices are compared to new prices, Lycoming is in the catbirds seat as they sell/make the parts. Maybe when Superior finally gets cranks and cases certified (they told me by this summer, but I've been told that before), there will be a break in the log jam. When Superior introduced their cylinder kits, the Lycoming price dropped 40% so - time will tell. One thing to watch out for if you are considering buying an engine of any model that has been overhauled is the details of the overhaul. This word "overhaul" means so many things to so many people that it basically means nothing. An overhauler could basically tear an engine down, confirm that it meets specs, put it back together and sign off the logs. I have run across these engines. Most however try to do a decent job of reconditioning parts so it will make TBO again. However, to stay under Lycoming's competitive price, they will likely have to re-use the cylinders and since cylinders do not have their own logs, you may get cylinders that have several TBO's on them, which makes it unlikely that you will get a full TBO out of them again. The devil is in the details. A partial checklist of things to ask might include: Crankcase : Total time, any major repairs, wide deck or narrow. Wide deck is preferred and can be identified for sure by the engines serial number which will end in an "A". Narrow deck engines are not doweled and are more prone to fretting. Crankshaft: This is the most expensive item in the engine, $5,000 for a new one. They can be ground down at overhaul, but only to a point, so if your overhauled engines includes a crank ground down to minimums, you might be left with an unserviceable one when you reach the next overhaul - this greatly diminishes the value of your core. You also need to be sure it meets Service Bulletin 505, inspection of the hollow portion of the front of the crank. Cam/Followers : New or re-ground. Pistons, pins, exhaust valves and bearings will be new. Cylinders : New or reconditioned? There is a great article on this at AvWeb's site, I won't repeat it here. IO-360, 200hp This is what I bought. Your best source of these in my opinion is the ones from Mooney conversions. Rich folks with lots of disposable income have their perfectly good 200 HP Lycoming removed and replace it with a 300 HP Continental at $65,000 a pop. These same people generally take good care of their Mooneys, fly them often and let the conversion company sell them for core value or a little more. IO-360's are not yet in as high a demand as the O-360 since there are less homebuilts designed around this engine. However, this is rapidly changing as more RV-8 kits are being sold. Putting one in a Cozy Mk IV is not as simple as the O-360, but it does fit with some fiddling, the extra horsepower can't hurt and they are very reliable. One model in particular that you will find from the Mooneys is the IO-360-A3B6D. This engine has one the dual mag driven off a single gear. While it is debatable just how reliable this arrangement is, the engine has a bad reputation because of this mag, which causes a lower demand which in turn makes them easier to find for less money. This however does not have to be problem for you as you can pull the dual mag, slip in a single and then install a separate electronic ignition from Jeff Rose for the second set of plugs. Sources Trade a Plane. I went this route and had limited results. It is very rare to find an O-360 in it from a private party and if you do, then you have to hope they live somewhere close to you. If you do decide to subscribe, I would recommend going for the 3 month, 2 day Priority Mail subscription ($32). If you wait until your local FBO get his stack, anything decent will be gone by the time you call in this market. Insurance Salvage Lists I subscribed for a year, there was generally nothing to even bid on. Salvage Yards Here is where you really need to be a detective or lucky. Wentworth is buying up most of the salvage at almost any price. If you call them up to ask for a price on an engine, you can see the results of this when they quote you a ridiculous price. They do sell them all eventually however, that's just how hot it is out there. Most salvage yard don't have any 180/200 HP engines, but when you find one, it's time to dig in and find out the conditions of the accident. Get the tail number and go to the Landings Home Page. Look up the accident and find out the pilot's name. Chances are he is still alive if the engine is still good. I called a few and got a variety of responses, but it's the only real way to find out how severe the prop strike may have been. Regardless of what you find out, you still need to plan on a teardown of the engine to inspect the crankshaft for cracks, even if the flange dials out ok. A "shoving" of the crankshaft may not show when you check the flange runout and the oil slinger could be cracked internally. There also may be damage from a sudden stoppage as well. Another consideration is just how long it has been since the accident. It is not unusual at all to see wrecked planes sit for a year or two with no corrosion protection on the engine while the insurance claims or lawsuits get settled. Maybe it survives just fine, maybe not, all you can do is dig into it's history as deep as you can. Finding A Fair Price This is a tough one a well since there are so many variables, but as a guideline I used the following : Core Cost + $5.00 * Time Left To Overhaul. O-320 and IO-360 core prices are still fairly stable, but the demand for O-360 cores can range from $6,000 to $8,000 for a good first run core. Total time on the engine becomes important since cylinder heads typically don't last past 4000 hours. Crank cases become more prone to cracking and in general, the engine just starts to wear out. This does not mean that a good high time engine cannot be a good value, just that time may be against you. At the same time, a first run engine may not be a good value if it has only been flown 50 hours per year and corrosion has started to break down the parts. I would favor a 1500 hour engine that is 10 years old over a 1000 hour engine that 20 years old. All things being the same, you may get more hours on the higher time engine before having to overhaul it and when you do, the parts may be in better shape providing a lower cost. Sources Salvage Yards: There is only one that I could recommend and that's Quality Aircraft Salvage in Florida. Their 800 number is in the archives, ask for Don, the owner. Mooney Conversion: Lori at ModWorks in Florida, where I found mine, 1-800-231-0201. They now advertise in Sport Aviation, so the demand may have increased. Rocket in Spokane, WA does Mooney conversions too and there is an outfit in Texas that advertises in Trade A Plane that has the occasional engine. Internet: I had no luck running an ad, but I searched "aviation classifieds" often. I'd get a hit now and then, got the occasional serious lead and this is where I first found the engine that Marc bought. Trade A Plane: Like I said earlier, not a good source for engines in general. Resources There is some good stuff on the Net, especially Greg Travis's page (http://www.prime-mover.org/). Kas Thomas wrote a good, but expensive book called The Major Overhaul which is a good primer on what wears on an engine. Generally speaking, you'll learn as you go along. Read over the AD's that apply to your prospective engine to know what to look for. There will be "little" ones that you'll never find, but the expensive ones can be found on Greg's page. Also there is a complete list of all the Lycoming models. Also, do a Deja News search for posts from Greg Travis and Rod Farlee, both whom have written of with great depth. I've forgotten quite a bit, others can probably add to this. I wish I could say that there was some good news or easy sources, but for me it came down to lots of learning, hunting and then being ready to act when I found one. I rejected dozens of engines after asking some basic questions, but in the end found what I was looking for. Good hunting. Eric From: "Steve Campbell" Subject: COZY: Engines Date: Fri, 26 Sep 1997 14:16:25 While we are on the subject of engines, I am trying to get together a group that might be interested in purchasing Franklins from Pat Goodman at Atlas. As of Oshkosh, Pat was asking $10,700 for a brand new, certified, broken in, 220 HP engine. You have to add accessories to that, but most of us wind up putting on light weight starters and alternators and many add new mags and/or carbs on our engines anyway. I believe that if we can get together a group to purchase a block of the engines, we will be able to negotiate down from the normal asking price. The plan would be to buy them in the spring (~late April). So far one other person has indicated a strong interest. I'm not looking $$ or any serious commitment, just a statement of interest so I can begin talking to Atlas. So how about it, is anyone else interested? Steve ************************************************ Stephen A. Campbell, Associate Professor, ECE University of Minnesota 200 Union Street Minneapolis 55455 (612) 625-5876 phone / (612) 625-4583 fax Campbell@ee.umn.edu ************************************************* From: "LOUIS LAURIELLO" Organization: SERVICE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA Date: Sat, 27 Sep 1997 10:31:42 -700 Subject: COZY: Auto engines Looking for info on Subaru engines for aircraft use. I know people are using the eg33 engine and was wanting info on the er27 engine. What I do know is this is a 6 Cylnder, 2.7 liters and the shop manual says it produces 145 hp @ 5200 rpm. 145 hp is not enough for the cozy, but can it be made higher? I'm interested in this engine because of the price ,used from Japan $800.00, complete minus the computer and cables. Thanks Lou Lauriello by m5.boston.juno.com (queuemail) id T}S22248; Sun, 28 Sep 1997 19:06:44 EDT Subject: Re: COZY: slick mags From: mbeduhn@juno.com (Mark W Beduhn) Date: Sun, 28 Sep 1997 19:06:44 EDT On Thu, 25 Sep 1997 08:50:37 -0400 (EDT) Bes1612@aol.com writes: >greetings all; > >I'm working on my Tomahawk, O-235-2LC. Anyone have a sugjestion for a >good >manual on the electical system? I've had the mags off and need some >instruction on timing. > >Thanks. >(Lurker, turned questioner, hopeful to be a contributer someday!) >I get a great deal, and enjoy the comments and questions in this >forum. >Thanks a lot Mark > I had the same problem when I installed mags on my engine. I finally went to the local airport mechanics and they told me what to do. Here it is: 1) Take the spark plugs off and rotate the engine until the #1 cylinder is on the compression stroke and TDC. 2) Rotate the engine back 20-25 degrees (depending upon the engine) BTDC. 3) Open the access plug on the mag so you can see the timing gear and find the red one (Bendix mag - I'm not sure about Slick). 4) Stick something fairly soft in the hole to hold the gear in position. My mechinics have a customized clothspin. 5) Install mag. 6) Use a mag timer to fine tune the timing (borrow one from your local mechanics and ask them to show you how to use it). FYI... I bought our three mechanics lunch once ($20), and I figure that I have received at least $1000 return on that investment. They have never charged me anything for all of the help, advice and tool loans that they have given me. Making friends with the local aircraft mechanics is one of the best things a homebuilder can do. Mark Beduhn Cozy N494CZ done, still waiting for the FAA inspection...Hmmm, mabe the inspector would show up if I bought him lunch... Date: Sun, 28 Sep 1997 23:09:03 -0400 From: "Edmond A. Richards" Subject: Re: COZY: Engine Stories Jim Cullen wrote: >It would be of great help to me and probably to others who have yet to g= o after their engines.< I was, I think (hope), very fortunate to find an O-360-A4A here in Florid= a. The engine has 100 hrs. since Factory (Lycoming) overhaul and was salvag= ed from a Piper Cherokee 180. The Cherokee went down in a forced landing fr= om fuel exhaustion so as a result the engine was not making any power at the= time. The engine was disassembled, inspected and the crankshaft magnifluxed (sp?). Finding no damage to the crankshaft the engine was reassembled as a certified aircraft engine. The engine came complete wit= h all accessories and log books and was only missing the carburetor (not needed for a Cozy). I was able to trade the stock starter and alternator= back (I installed B&C units) for a more needed oil cooler. = I purchased the engine a year and a half ago from Quality Aircraft Salvag= e in Groveland Florida for $11,500. Certainly not cheap but hopefully a reliable power plant. Quality Aircraft Salvage is within driving distanc= e from my house so I has able to look at the engine before I purchased it a= nd pick it up myself. Don Huntington, who owns QAS, has a good reputation i= n the area and is a fellow EZ builder. = Quality Aircraft Salvage 1-800-752-6399 It will probably be another year or more before I am ready to fly my Cozy= so I wont really know until then what kind of purchase I made. At this point I have, what I believe, is a good engine for the plane. Ed Richards Cozy Mark IV #088 Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 13:48:40 -0500 From: Sam Pavel Subject: COZY: New Engine Development Greetings, Here is an interesting engine development for those of you thinking about alternatives to the Lycoming. http://www.deltahawkengines.com I saw the engine at OSH. It looks promising. Sam Sam Pavel spavel@du.edu Visiting Professor University of Denver Department of Economics (303)871-2245 From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: COZY: New Engine Development (fwd) Date: Wed, 1 Oct 97 16:10:45 EDT Sam Pavel wrote: >Here is an interesting engine development for those of you thinking about >alternatives to the Lycoming. > > http://www.deltahawkengines.com The delta hawk and the universal engineering diesel (info at): http://universalengineering.com _USED_ to be the same company, but there was some sort of business disagreement and one member of the partnership split with the prototype. Both are now developing very similar engines. I saw the original at OSHKOSH in 1995, and neither one seems to be much further along at this point then they were two years ago (Zoche all over again, as far as I can tell). The claims are the same, the stated status is substantially similar. This would be a PERFECT engine for a COZY (as testing on a Velocity indicates), but I'll believe that they exist and are usable when a few have actually flown and demonstrated real performance. Till then, it's just vaporware, and late vaporware at that. -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 19:22:16 -0400 From: David Domeier Subject: Re: COZY: New Engine Development Chris, Re deltahawk: I also talked with these people at OSH and was very impressed. This engine is being designed and built for an airplane, it is not an auto conversion. For those interested here is their latest status report: PROJECT STATUS: * The initial prototype has been running since January, 1997. Other test-stage engines are in various steps of development depending on their test purpose and the progress of that test thread. * Results so far: o Starts very quickly; instantly when it is warm. o With the engine kept at 40 degrees, no trouble starting at sub-freezing external temperatures. o Extremely smooth-running at all rpm settings up to 2500 (the maximum tested). o Idles smoothly down to 450 rpm; very quiet at low rpm settings. o Nearly instantaneous response to throttle adjustments. o No discernable wear on critical components to date. * We're still working on: o Air flow supply adjustments to achieve full rated horsepower. o Final fuel pump and injector selections and installations. o Further weight reduction when components are finalized. o Final cold weather start limits and procedures. * When satisfactory test-bed results are obtained, we will begin endurance tests and flight testing. Planned tests and analyses include: fuel flow and power/torque curves (initial ones already created), endurance test, vibration/accelerometer tests, oil usage. Just wanted to let you know I am not a closed minded neanderthal with regard to engines. This one and Zoch, I think have promise. dd From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 20:03:29 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: New Engine Development Having worked for 20 years in 2 Ford Engine Plants (302 CID, 5.0L inc. HO Mustang, 4.9L, 35M, 532 CID, and the Duratec), I can assure that it takes around 6 years to bring an engine to production, and then we have all seen recalls on our own vehicles. We still have problems with old reliables of all models. I guess what I am saying, maybe in 5 years or more this new engine will find itself into a few aircraft. When it is reliably flying in 50 aircraft at flight schools, pipeline patrol, or somewhere to get a couple thousand hours on, then think about flying it yourself. Its good to have progress with new engines, but for now, concentrate on building the best aircraft you can.. Ps: I have a diesel tractor that I mow lawn and plow snow. It has glow plugs which it need below 70F. I have many times started the COSY at temps below 40F, they will have to make cold weather starting a priority. Carl Denk: "cdenk@ix.netcom.com" Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 23:25:31 -0500 From: Chris Anderson Subject: Re: Re: COZY: New Engine Development At 08:41 PM 10/1/97 -0400, SWrightFLY@aol.com wrote: > >In a message dated 10/1/97 8:55:56 PM, andersoc@wi.net wrote: > ><This is the engine I plan to use. > >=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- >Chris Anderson andersoc@wi.net>> > >What advantages do you feel this has over aircraft engines which are >currently available???? >Steve Wright Well first let me clarify, that I, not Deltahawk, will be constructing my Cozy. I realized after the message came back I forgot an extra I in there. In regards to the vapor-hardware aspect (would that make it firmware? Would a new PROM give me more horsepower? sorry, EE joke...) As it happens I stopped to look over the Delta Hawk engine 2 years ago at Oshkosh, and the day was particularly hot. This is relevant because the good fellow at the DH booth had an HP 9000 workstation, with the cad drawings for the engine surface shaded in the booth. Or at least it was till he kept blowing the breaker about every 10 min. I happened to be a network admin for MSOE's Rapid Prototyping lab, and I happened to have one of these, using similar software (we had ProE and Unigraphics, he was using Ideas if I remember right) and I helped him get through some problems caused by the repeated system crashes. And we got to talking about RP, and he had some really nice pictures of LOM masters of the crank-case. (specifically of the prototype which www.universalengineering.com has on they're page) Now, as I spent 2 years being a LOMGuy, I know that master was at least $3000 for machine time alone (twas full scale of course, built as 2 sides it looked like), and I saw several masters for different sections. I make no claim at all that this means a whole lot, but the way I see it, if they know enough to use RP and lost foam (which he mentioned while we talked) I take that as a good sign. I see this as an indicator that they know what will work to bring they're product online quickly. As far as the reliability issue, you have an excellent point. I would argue however 2 points here, #1, I won't need an engine for at least 2 years. It'll be 9 months before my Sig Other is done with collage, and I won't be able to get very far during the moves and other details involved there. I intend to build the bird per-plans except the retracts, any mods due to the engine choice I'll leave till last. If they're isn't a commercially available engine in 2 years, I'll buy a referb 200hp IO-360. #2 Since one of the engines is in FAA cert. testing, there will be some data from that engine. As for the good points: Diesel. No mags, no plugs, no cams, no moving valves etc. the engine itself is simpler, and thus more reliable. It runs or Jet-A, #2 diesel, and I suspect on other stuff too. this makes it much cheaper to run. It's weighs less than an IO-360, not much but with luck enough to make up for the added weight of my retracts and const. speed prop. And it weighs MUCH less than the auto-conversions+reduction drive systems that I've seen. Burns less fuel volume, so I have more range on the same size tanks. About 26% more at 100% power based on they're reported burn. Engine will run at 50% power with no coolant. This makes the coolant system a less critical factor than it would be in liquid cooled Otto cycle engines. This engine is supercharged, (well so would be the IO-360 I'd be looking at) so I get relatively const. power vs. alt. This is a new engine. Not rebuilt, not remanufactured, not short TBO, new. No reduction gear is a Good Thing, less weight/noise/moving parts. No mixture control. Just a throttle and hopefully prop-pitch. (Not a huge advantage, but handy) I expect this to be significantly quieter than an IO-360. Bad things: I can't buy one yet cuse they aren't available. I was told experimental stage engines would be available before FAA certification. I.e. they'll sell you one as soon as they start making them if you want it that fast. Provided I've seen key pieces of data I'd be willing to do that. Hell, I actually thought of putting a ported Mazda Wankel in it for a while. Going to a pre-certified aircraft engine just shows how conservative I'm gettin in my old age.... *snicker* Without engine heating, I suspect it might start hard if the engine gets under the 40F that they mention. I'm sure they're using Jet fuel, which won't gel at that temp, but yes the bottom line is I will most likely have to keep a tank heater on it all winter if I expect to start it without an external power source. This doesn't bother me as our 172N has spent the last decade plugged it. (And boy, I highly recommend it if ya fly in the winter where it's cold... ) I also suspect that without some attention to fuel temp I might run into problems. My roomie and I (I'm and EE, he's and ME, we intend to build 2 at once, we'll see where he gets a job) have been pondering the idea of resistive electric or coolant heating for the fuel tanks to avoid geling with #2 at alt. We may just not risk it and always use Jet fuel. And of course it should be mentioned that from a practical point of view of getting a plane in the air, a used IO-360 is only about $10-12K while this is $15K not including radiator. I'll also have to build my own cowling, which could be really cool, or really ugly. *shrug* Now these things are of course WHAT I'VE BEEN TOLD by the manufacturer. And as such this entire cost/benefit assessment will happen again if/when I have more info from other sources. We'll see, I'll keep an eye on them. For now I'm still looking for a place to build the damn thing, and I hope to buy the plans in a month or so. It's kinda looking like I'll have to build a hangar, and that would suck. 8( Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 17:37:55 +0200 (GMT) From: pine@global.co.za (pine) Subject: COZY: Subaru Hi to all I received this posting a day ago. Maybe someone in the USA can contacket them to fill-in the rest of all the questions we all have Prices?? Same cowl?? esc. >Reiner at Stratus posted this to another list. I thought some of you may be >interested. > >< > we have just started to ship the first Subaru EJ22 180hp engines which are a direct > replacement for Lycoming O-360. They bolt up directly to the Lycoming mount for > ease of installation. 265# dry and 295# wet which is about 55# lighter then a lycoming 360 while > burning at least 20% less fuel by far smoother operation. > >> Pine Pienaar pine@global.co.za From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: COZY: Subaru EJ-22 Date: Tue, 7 Oct 97 12:05:53 EDT Pine Pienaar wrote: >Maybe someone in the USA can contacket them to fill-in the rest of all the >questions we all have >Prices?? Same cowl?? esc. >>Reiner at Stratus posted this to another list. I thought some of you may be >>interested. >> we have just started to ship the first Subaru EJ22 180hp engines which >are a direct replacement for Lycoming O-360...... I contacted Reiner Hoffman (Stratus Principal) about 10 months ago regarding his (very well regarded) conversion. Here was his response: >what's the price on the >180HP conversion, and what comes with it (ignition, PSRU, carb/fuel inj., >etc.) complete ready to go. carb, aircleaners, drive, dual ignition, vaccum pump on the 180 standard, alt 50 amp, plus basic instrumentation. no rad no prop no muffler, but basically everything else to run it. will bolt up to standard dynofocal lyc mount. $12695.00 complete FOB Seattle. first 15 will be brandnew motors, then we might have to go to rebuilds. >What do you mean by basic instrumentation (CHT, EGT, water temp., water >pressure, oil temp, oil pressure)? engine temp, oiltemp warning light for alternator and oilpress. any other instruments a builder wishes can be added. >I assume the PSRU can do pushers as well as tractors? >Is it possible to use a Ross planetary redrive with the same engine >mount? For the canards, this would likely be one requested option, if >the thrust line would end up being a lot higher than the O-360 thrust >line. trust line will be same as the lyc, thats the whole point. >Does the price stay the same for the rebuilds, and do any (new or >rebuilt) come with any sort of warrantee? price = same. 50hrs after signoff. neglect not included. >.... When mounted to a >std. dynafocal mount, is the CG of the engine closer or further away >to/from the firewall than the O-360, and if so, by how much? cg my best guess would be a bit closer towards the mount. You may contact Reiner directly at: reinerh@aol.com -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 20:35:24 -0400 From: Ian Douglas Organization: WTC Subject: COZY: LIO or IO? I also swung a deal to get the a time "X"ed engine (IO-360 or LIO-360) from the Seneca (about 40 hours left) when they get replaced. I need to know which engine to get in regards to a constant speed prop (the most common for pusher configured props). I know that Nat says that the IO with constant speed prop is too heavy (balast required) but I have taken Nigel's spreadsheet for weight and balance and the equipment list for the Seneca, I will have to place a 70lbs balast in the nose to fly solo but the take-off and climb performance will far out-weigh (excuse the pun) the added balast. Anyone know which is more common for a pusher configuration? -- Ian D.S. Douglas plans 69 and 626 by InfoAve.Net (PMDF V5.1-8 #23426) with SMTP id <01IONMNIFRNI8ZEG6F@InfoAve.Net> for cozy_builders@hpwarhw.an.hp.com; Fri, 10 Oct 1997 21:19:26 EDT Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 21:18:40 -0400 From: Jeff S Russell Subject: Re: COZY: LIO or IO? Organization: AEROCAD INC. http://www.aerocad.com Ian Douglas wrote: > > I also swung a deal to get the a time "X"ed engine (IO-360 or LIO-360) > from the Seneca (about 40 hours left) when they get replaced. I need to > know which engine to get in regards to a constant speed prop (the most > common for pusher configured props). An IO is a right handed prop and a LIO is a left. We and many Velocity aircraft are running the LIO because they are cheeper sometimes over the IO. Without the tail, P-factor will not be seen. An LIO-360 will need a tractor prop. The prop guys have no problem with this. -- Jeff Russell/AeroCad Inc. E-mail: Jeff@aerocad.com P.O. Box 7307 Port St. Lucie, Fl 34985-7307 Phone/ fax (call first): 910-961-2238 after Oct 31 561-460-8020 Composite workshop info: http://www.Sportair.com Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 22:40:12 -0400 From: Rob Cherney Subject: Re: COZY: LIO or IO? At 08:35 PM 10/10/97 -0400, Ian Douglas wrote: > I need to >know which engine to get in regards to a constant speed prop (the most >common for pusher configured props). Depends upon the type of IO-360 -- straight or angle valve. I would suggest you look for a model that has the prop governor mounting pad opposite cylinder number 1 (next to the prop flange). There is no certified straight-valve engine that is in this configuration that I know of. There are a couple of angle valve engines that have this configuration, though. The advantage of this arrangement is that you don't have interference with the firewall that is probable with the rear-mounted governor. Maybe the Velocity builders can make a suggestion. Rob- +------------------------------------------------------------------+ |Robert Cherney Home Phone: (410)465-5598 | |Ellicott City, Maryland e-mail: cherney@home.com | +------------------------------------------------------------------+ From: Bes1612@aol.com Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 00:44:49 -0400 (EDT) Subject: COZY: Air baffles Howdy; Maybe you AM's could tell me about the air baffles on an aircraft engin. I've had my engin out, and when I put it back in it wants to run hot! I think I need to replace the black sealing material around the engin. I don't know what the material is called, It looks like reinforced rubber. I also have some openings in other areas that I could stop air leaks. I saw on another piper warrior, they had sylicone on the baffles where the baffles comes up to the forward cylinder fins. (cyl. 1&2) Looked like to keep the air from going to the bottom of the cilinder first, (maybe). The had sylicone all over that engin to stop air leaks, around the engin mounting flanges, and around the oil cooler, etc. Is this common practice? Looks a little hokie. Whats the purpose for the sylicone along the forward cylinder fins? Thanks Bob Smith, Cozy #588 Working on canard. Ready to start spar cap, and bottom skin. by m5.boston.juno.com (queuemail) id X_Q22974; Mon, 20 Oct 1997 23:02:35 EDT Subject: COZY: Cylinder Head Temps From: mbeduhn@juno.com (Mark W Beduhn) Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 23:02:35 EDT Could those of you who are flying please let me know the cylinder head temps that you are getting? I have bayonet sensors and am looking for a corrilation between OAT, airspeed and head temps. Thanks Mark Beduhn Cozy IV N494CZ From: bryan.hennessy@amd.com Date: 21 Oct 1997 10:10:38 -0700 Delivery-Date: 21 Oct 1997 10:10:39 -0700 Original-Encoded-Information-Types: IA5-Text Subject: COZY: RE: [canard-aviators] Cylinder Head Temps Autoforwarded: FALSE Conversion: Allowed Conversion-With-Loss: Allowed Alternate-Recipient: Prohibited I get about 1400 max on my O-320-E2A with crome cylinders in my LongEZ. In a climb it can hit 1450 for a short time. This is with the sensors that are the washer type under the spark plugs. I'm told that this type reads about 50 high. Bryan N762BH ---- owner-canard-aviators(a)betaweb.com's Message ---- [The Canard Aviators's Mailing list] Could those of you who are flying please let me know the cylinder head temps that you are getting? I have bayonet sensors and am looking for a corrilation between OAT, airspeed and head temps. Thanks Mark Beduhn Cozy IV N494CZ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- (c) 1997 Canard Aviators. This information is provided solely and exclusively for the personal use of Canard aircraft builders and Pilots and may not be used, copied, quoted or referenced in any other publication or medium without the express written consent of Canard Aviators support@canard.com. From: bryan.hennessy@amd.com Date: 21 Oct 1997 13:15:07 -0700 Delivery-Date: 21 Oct 1997 13:15:07 -0700 Original-Encoded-Information-Types: IA5-Text Subject: COZY: RE: [canard-aviators] Cylinder Head Temps Autoforwarded: FALSE Conversion: Allowed Conversion-With-Loss: Allowed Alternate-Recipient: Prohibited Sorry, I was thinking EGT, my CHT is 425 max and the oil is about 190. If I don't lean out the EGT is about 1300 Bryan ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? I get about 1400 max on my O-320-E2A with crome cylinders in my LongEZ. In a climb it can hit 1450 for a short time. This is with the sensors that are the washer type under the spark plugs. I'm told that this type reads about 50 high. Bryan N762BH ---- owner-canard-aviators(a)betaweb.com's Message ---- [The Canard Aviators's Mailing list] Could those of you who are flying please let me know the cylinder head temps that you are getting? I have bayonet sensors and am looking for a corrilation between OAT, airspeed and head temps. Thanks Mark Beduhn Cozy IV N494CZ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- (c) 1997 Canard Aviators. This information is provided solely and exclusively for the personal use of Canard aircraft builders and Pilots and may not be used, copied, quoted or referenced in any other publication or medium without the express written consent of Canard Aviators support@canard.com. From: wilhelmson@scra.org Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 11:27:56 -0500 Subject: Re: COZY: Cylinder Head Temps Mark: This is my cyl. head temp story, I will keep it short as possible. I have worked on my cylinder head temps until I am blue in the face. The problem is a common one with the Cozy. the #4 cyl. runs hottest the #3 next and the two rear cylinders are lower. I flew for 300 hrs with only a bayonet on my #4 underside. It ran between 390 f and 450(well within the 500 limit). My engine stuck the rings and I suspected Phillips synthetic oil or too high temps or both. With mew cylinders I installed sensors under all four plugs on top. I found temps of 475 to +550 highest on the front cylinders again(#1 100 less than #4). The bayonet on the underside still registered the 390 to 450 on #4, while the top plug was over 555 in cruise and went up in a climb to the point I had to throttle back). I tried baffles in the cowling to divert air as recommended by Nat.(no improvement) Finally, out of desperation I put 6" dia. closed ducts from the NACA inlet to the number three and four cyl. I used aluminum flex dryer hose for trial. This has finally balance the temps. The temp at the top plugs runs 75 to 125 higher than under the cyl bayonet. Therefore the limits that can be tolerated are higher. All my cylinders are now within limits. I plan to install permanent ducting. The Lycoming limits are 500 at the bayonet on the hot side. By my tests, this would be 450 at the bayonet on the cool side and 550 at the lug on the hot side. Many people report much lower temps, but this is the best I can get. My engine is a O320 150hp. OAT makes a small diff. airspeed at cruse is relative to throttle and the temp usually goes down with lower throttle settings. High throttle settings and low airspeed (climb) is the worst case. Jack Wilhelmson N711CZ ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: COZY: Cylinder Head Temps Author: mbeduhn@juno.com (Mark W Beduhn) at Internet_gateway Date: 10/20/97 11:02 PM Could those of you who are flying please let me know the cylinder head temps that you are getting? I have bayonet sensors and am looking for a corrilation between OAT, airspeed and head temps. Thanks Mark Beduhn Cozy IV N494CZ by post.larc.nasa.gov (8.8.6.1/pohub4.2) with SMTP id HAA02157 for ; Wed, 29 Oct 1997 07:50:23 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 07:45:33 -0500 From: Paul Krasa Subject: Re: COZY: Cylinder Head Temps At 11:27 10/28/97 -0500, wilhelmson@scra.org wrote: > Mark: This is my cyl. head temp story, I will keep it short as > possible. > snip I learned alot from helping a friend of mine get his cylinder head tempratures under control. As usual his Cozy had high cylinder tempratures during initial testing. After adding scopes, increasing the size of the Naca and adding a ramp in the cowl with no changes, we installed manometer tubes in the low and high pressure sides of the cowling. The tubs ran into the cabin and were hooked to a simple manometer made out of an oil can, a piece of tube, and colored water. The tubes were 1/4" id clear tubing purchased at the local hardware store with cotton balls taped to the ends to act as diffusers. The cotton balls are necessary to eliminate ram air effects. The manometers told us alot of information. For the cylinders to cool properly, the pressure drop accross the cylinders from the high pressure side to the low pressure side must be 5" of water. The manometer readings told us where leaks were occuring in flight. The reason: pressure cowls expand. Once the chafe seals were redone to acount for this, the manometers told us that there was adequate pressure drop accros all cylinders for cooling, but all cylinder tempratures were still out of limits, but since we knew it was not an air flow problem, we looked at other areas. What we found was the vernitherm valve was bad. The vernitherm valve acts like a thermostat in a car, except it is in the oil system. As the oil heats up the valve opens. If the valve does not open then the oil flow to the oil cooler is restricted. To check this valve place it in an oven with a candy thermometer and visually watch it retract as the temprature rises. Once this valve was changed, all cylinder temps were within limits. The last thing we used the manometers for was to balance the flow between the cylinders. By choking off the flow to #1 and #2 cylinders in incremental amounts, the pressure drop accross each cylinder can be matched. When the pressure drops are approximately the same each cylinder will run at approximately the same temp. This method takes some work, but it takes the guess work out of fixing cooling problems. Paul Krasa Long EZ 214LP From: DevoCoach@aol.com Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 12:38:35 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: COZY: Cylinder Head Temps Dear Paul; A couple of questions about cooling. (1)What was the symptom of the bad vernitherm valve? If it restricted flow to the oil cooler, were your oil temps high? How high? (2) If the cowl expanded during flight, did the chafe seals blow back and allow air to escape? Couldn't that be determined by checking them inside the cowl after flight? (3) How did you choke off air to #1 and #2, by ramps in the bottom cowl? Or by closing the baffling opening around each cylinder? I have 84 hours on my cozy and have wrestled (as everyone does!) with cooling. I had a rebuilt engine which caused high temps during the first 25 hours of break-in. However, during that time I never had oil temps higher than 180, yet CHTs were routinely in the 470 - 480 degree area. I have ramps in the bottom cowl, and have removed about 3/4" from the trailing edge of the cowl. I cannot say for certain if those measures, or the engine break-in, cured the problem, but now, my temps are in the 390-430 (indicated on gauge) range. The most important thing I have learned (if I had it to do over again) is to use a calibrated cht system! I have Westach stuff, and I find it very unreliable. When measured against a calibrated unit on the ground my system indicates anywhere from 40 to 65 degrees hotter than actual. Add to that, that you must always make a "cold junction temperature" correction for each degree cooler or hotter than 72 degrees that the sender's cold junction temperature actually is (cold junction temp: the actual temp at the junction of the end of the sender cable, which is on the engine side of the firewall). Without another air temp gauge to tell what that correction is, it is nearly impossible to know what the CHT's are! Does anyone know what the air temp is inside the cowl, close to the lower firewall, when it is 52 degrees? 92 degrees? Without that info, who knows what I am actually reading in the air! I am not busting on Westach, (I believe Rocky Mountain uses Westach senders also) They can give useful comparative information. However, for airplanes like ours, that have a critical, and historic problem with engine cooling, it would be nice to know EXACTLY what the temps are before we start cutting holes in cowling, or worse, making an emergency landing because of a perceived overtemp! My 2 cents!! Jeff Mallia Cozy N46WM From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 19:04:25 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Cylinder Head Temps The exact temperatures are available, at a price.I have an ultimate scanner, and it is the greatest for troubleshooting. Several years ago we landed briefly at Tristate, Huntington, WVA. On takeoff, I noticed rate of climb down a bit. The scanner alerted to EGT and CHT down on a cylinder, stopped at OSU ,Athen, Ohio, pulled injector nozzle for that cylinder, blew out with mouth, reassembled. 15 minutes lost including removing only top cowling. That sort of ability is worth the money to me. by post.larc.nasa.gov (8.8.6.1/pohub4.2) with SMTP id LAA09642; Thu, 30 Oct 1997 11:35:42 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 11:26:44 -0500 From: Paul Krasa Subject: Re: COZY: Cylinder Head Temps At 12:38 10/29/97 -0500, DevoCoach@aol.com wrote: >Dear Paul; > >A couple of questions about cooling. (1)What was the symptom of the bad >vernitherm valve? If it restricted flow to the oil cooler, were your oil >temps high? How high? The syptpom was all cylinders and oil temps were high. Which was originally diagnosed to be not enough air flow across the cylinders and potentially through the oil cooler. (2) If the cowl expanded during flight, did the chafe >seals blow back and allow air to escape? Couldn't that be determined by >checking them inside the cowl after flight? The cowl seals did not blow back. There were gaps in the seals where not enough overlap existed in localized areas such that localized leakage occured (3) How did you choke off air >to #1 and #2, by ramps in the bottom cowl? Or by closing the baffling opening >around each cylinder? Close the baffling around the bottom of the cylinder. > >I have 84 hours on my cozy and have wrestled (as everyone does!) with >cooling. I had a rebuilt engine which caused high temps during the first 25 >hours of break-in. However, during that time I never had oil temps higher >than 180, If your oil temp is around 180 then you are getting plenty of cooling in the oil. yet CHTs were routinely in the 470 - 480 degree area. I have ramps >in the bottom cowl, and have removed about 3/4" from the trailing edge of the >cowl. I cannot say for certain if those measures, or the engine break-in, >cured the problem, but now, my temps are in the 390-430 (indicated on gauge) >range. That is the same problem we had. You can't tell what is happening in the cowl without taking pressure measurements. I can not claim that using manometers was my idea. A member of EAA 724 had used the same method to solve cooling problems on his Glasiar. >snip< I agree with you. One of the things to accomplish is checking the calibration of the gauges prior ot first start. I have Westach gauges, I have checked each one at known temps and pressures. They all were within acceptable limits. To check oil temp., I placed the temp pick up in boiling water with a known good thermometer, and the gauge read within 5F of the thermometer. For the thermocouples, I used a hot plate for the CHT, and a flame from lighter for the EGT, and a calibrated reader and thermocouple . The method is crude but it worked. For pressure transducers, I used a small hydralic pump with a gauge. Again all gauges wre within 2-3%, so said that was close enough. Paul Krasa Long EZ 214LP Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 21:08:49 -0800 (PST) From: "Mr. Radon" Subject: Re: COZY: Temperature Patches On Thu, 30 Oct 1997, Nigel Field wrote: > Been trying without success to locate a source for stick on temperature > patches in the 170 to 220 F range to conduct some cooling tests. Anyone > know where I can get these? > > TIA > > Nigel Field > > We're using these on the 737-700 flight test program to check the temps of the de-icing system. I'm at home right now, but I think the manufacturer is Whall (sp). I'm sending a copy to work and will post a message if the name is incorrect. I'll also see if I can find the supplier. They sure are handy. Got a few to play with when I get to the taxi stage. Roy - 777-200X Structures (425) 294-6485 with SMTP (Eudora Internet Mail Server 1.2); Fri, 31 Oct 1997 00:23:37 +0000 From: "John Stricker" Subject: Re: COZY: Temperature Patches Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 23:16:48 -0600 Nigel, My McMaster-Carr is an older one, but they have listed several types of labels and crayons in a multitude of temperature ranges. One decal type is available in .25", .32", and .56" diameter with indicating dots of 140, 160,180, & 220 deg. F. Also available in other ranges. Look for them under "Temperature Indicators" and "Temperature Indicating Labels" John Stricker Remove the "nosp..........." Oh hell, you folks know what to do and why I had to put it in. "I didn't spend all these years getting to the top of the food chain just to become a vegitarian" -----Original Message----- From: Nigel Field To: cozy_builders@hpwarhw.an.hp.com Date: Thursday, October 30, 1997 5:49 PM Subject: COZY: Temperature Patches :Been trying without success to locate a source for stick on temperature :patches in the 170 to 220 F range to conduct some cooling tests. Anyone :know where I can get these? : :TIA : :Nigel Field : From: "Grossinger, Roy H" Subject: RE: COZY: Temperature Patches Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 13:42:24 -0800 Yep I goofed the name up. The manufacturer is Wahl, they make quality stuff. They were bought by Instrumentation Group, but still operate under Wahl. Anyhow, the number to call is 1-800-421-2853, FAX (310) 670-2840. They have different scales with varying ranges, and the stickers come in three sizes. I have a FAX listing the different Temp-Plates. I can send a copy to you (Nigel) if you want or you can call the company yourself. Cost is around $20-$35 for a box of ten. The P/N for 170-220 F are: 101-6-170F (mini size, 6 positions 170-180-190-200-210-220) 101-8-190F (mini size, 8 positions 190-200-210-220-230-240-250-260) 240-170F (Std size, 4 positions, 170-180-190-200) Many other P/n's for diffenent ranges, positions, shapes. Hope this helps... Roy Grossinger 777-200X Structures (425) 294-6485 > On Thu, 30 Oct 1997, Nigel Field wrote: > > > Been trying without success to locate a source for stick on > temperature > > patches in the 170 to 220 F range to conduct some cooling tests. > Anyone > > know where I can get these? > > > > TIA > > > > Nigel Field > > > > > We're using these on the 737-700 flight test program to check the > temps > of the de-icing system. I'm at home right now, but I think the > manufacturer is Whall (sp). I'm sending a copy to work and will post > a > message if the name is incorrect. I'll also see if I can find the > supplier. They sure are handy. Got a few to play with when I get to > the > taxi stage. > > Roy - 777-200X Structures > (425) 294-6485 > Date: Mon, 03 Nov 1997 19:00:45 -0500 From: Paul Burkhardt Subject: COZY: Vacuum port Has anyone found a location to pull a vacuum for the electronic ignition . I'm using an ellison and there just isn't a port for it. Any help would be appreciated. Paul Burkhardt Date: Mon, 3 Nov 1997 23:15:40 -0500 From: "Edmond A. Richards" Subject: COZY: Vacuum port Paul, I am installing the Rocky Mountain Inst engine monitor and they claim you= can use one of the primer ports on the cylinder for the manifold pressure= sensing. Maybe that would work for the ignition as well. Probably need = to use a small orifice and a reasonable traped volume to keep the pressure (vacuum) smooth. For what its worth. Ed Richards Cozy Mark IV #88 Date: Tue, 04 Nov 1997 14:40:56 -0800 From: Stetson Elliott Subject: Re: COZY: Vacuum port Paul Burkhardt wrote: > Has anyone found a location to pull a vacuum for the electronic > ignition > . I'm using an ellison and there just isn't a port for it. Any help > would be appreciated. Paul Burkhardt I have a friend who pulls the vacuum from a cylinder primer port (for Lightspeed Engineering ignition). I was dubious, afraid that that close to the intake valve would cause pressure fluctuations. However, his installation seems to work fine. -- Stet Elliott flyez@earthlink.net Long-EZ N321EF Date: Tue, 04 Nov 1997 17:49:47 -0500 From: Ian Douglas Organization: WTC Subject: COZY: Engines Hi All, I am picking up 8 engines next week and was wondering what cores are worth. I know that they are all 6 cylinder, but that is all I know. There are 4 Lycomings, 1 Continental and 2 Franklins (I don't know the sizes yet). They were going to be sold for scap!!! As soon as I check out the serial numbers I should be able to trace them (as far as I understand they have never flown, just used for teardown and re-assembly for an AME school). -- Ian D.S. Douglas MK0069 Date: Tue, 04 Nov 1997 17:58:44 -0500 From: Ian Douglas Organization: WTC Subject: COZY: Engines Me again, Does the Continental O-360 come with 6 cylinders? I know the Lycoming is a 4. Can you tell I'm just a little excited about this find? If the Franklins are 220 HP and the Continental is an O-360 that means I would have three engines that could fit Cozys of which I would be willing to sell one (I would want to keep the Franklins as they appear to be the cheapest to overhaul) -- Ian D.S. Douglas MK0069 Date: Tue, 04 Nov 1997 22:11:33 -0500 From: "Jeff S. Russell (http://www.aerocad.com)" Organization: AeroCad Inc. Subject: Re: COZY: Engines Ian Douglas wrote: > Does the Continental O-360 come with 6 cylinders? This is a skymaster engine. We had one that was going in our Velocity RG that we sold and the weight was about 400 lbs. Our Lycoming IO-360 was about 330 lbs. Velocity told us not to install that heavy of engine. 70+ lbs is hard to balance :-) I still have not heard how much the Franklin weight realy is. -- Jeff Russell/AeroCad Inc. E-mail: Jeff@aerocad.com P.O. Box 7307 Port St. Lucie FL. 34985 Shop# 561-460-8020 Home# 561-343-7366 Composite workshop info: http://www.Sportair.com Date: Tue, 04 Nov 1997 22:22:51 -0500 From: Ian Douglas Organization: WTC Subject: Re: COZY: Engines In wanting to share my excitment I made this post. I think that it may not have been the wisest of things to do in that I do not KNOW what there is. I will be looking at the engines next tuesday and most likely buying all of them (the core values alone should make it worth it). If any of the engines are suitable for Cozy use, I will post here FIRST. -- Ian D.S. Douglas MK0069 Date: Wed, 05 Nov 1997 21:45:59 -0500 From: David Domeier Subject: Re: COZY: Vacuum port Paul, I have a Jeff Rose system and have hooked up the vacumm line to the #4 cylinder primer port. Seems to be working OK so far, although I have just run the engine 4 or 5 times while I finish the beast. I also have my vacuum gage sense hooked up to the same line and it is quite steady. I have 4 primer lines hooked up to the injection ports and that seems to work fine also. dd MKIV #155 Engine Lyc 0-360A4M P.S. For you guys interested in sweat time - 1860.5 hours recorded - five and half years - probably another 400-500 hrs not logged... and it ain't near over yet!! I go away for a week and the pin hole couples have had more kids... Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 20:11:36 -0500 From: Ian Douglas Organization: WTC Subject: Re: COZY: Engines Well I had a look today... There are 3 Franklin Engines and they are 330's (210 HP) not 350's (220 HP). After talking with the guys at Atlas I decided not to buy them. The engines are from helicopters and they have the cylinders with 14mm spark plugs (the cylinders with 18mm spark plugs are supposed to be OK to use). They also have no logs... The continental and Lycoming engines where HUGE 6 cyls from helicopters as well. -- Ian D.S. Douglas MK0069 From: "Fred I. Mahan" Subject: COZY: Lead Fouling Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 07:31:02 -0500 Willaim, I started out using 100 LL in my Long w/O-235L2C, 8.5 compression ratio. Originally, I didn't have a starter and hand-propped to start. After six months or a year, my engine started to get "morning sickness" (valve sticking). I could feel cylinders with low compression while I was propping. When the engine started it ran rough and jumped around on the mount until the valves all worked properly, and it smoothed out. This problem slowly got worse. I started using TCP. It helped, but the problem never went away entirely. A friend, Neil Hunter, was using Amoco high-test 93 octane in his Velocity (200 hp IO-360, 8.7 compression ratio), so I decided to try it in one tank on my Long. Cruising or at full throttle, there was very little EGT or CHT difference between the gasolines, giving the fuel lines time to purge. Only difference I've noticed is that the stacks are light gray after using 100LL, but are dark gray or almost black after using Amoco 93, even with proper leaning. No fuel flow difference, so I guess it's just the residues. I switched over to Amoco 93 for all of my local flying, and the "morning sickness" went away. I use it hot weather and cold (well, cold as it gets here in Florida ;-> ) and have had no problems. Some time ago I added a starter (1981-84 Honda Prelude, on an aluminum bracket) so I'm not as acutely aware of "morning sickness" as I was when I was hand-propping. Naturally, when I'm travelling I use 100LL, and TCP if I can get it. I've found out that 100LL's 2 gm of tetraethyl lead per gallon is about twice what ~8.5 compression ratio engines were originally designed around, the old 91/96 octane engines. 91/96 octane gas had, I think, 1 gm of tetraethyl lead per gallon, so I suppose if you were to mix one gallon of 100LL and 1 gallon of Amoco 93, you'd get that "optimum" 1 gm per gallon mix, but I've always been too lazy to mix the gasolines. Several of us have had scraps of Safety Poxy/EZ Poxy layups in jars of Amoco 93 for several years, and every time we take them out, they still scratch and aren't gummy. I stick with Amoco because they don't use alcohol in their gasolines, and for political reasons -- they supported the EAA in the 70's when testing was first being done on autogas STC's. There are differences between 100LL and Amoco 93. You can see it if you put a saucer of each out to evaporate. The 100LL evaporates completely. The Amoco evaporation slows down and the residue gets thicker and thicker. I just haven't seen any practical difference in burning one over the other, except that I get the valve sticking with the 100LL. That's my autogas/long-EZ story. Hope it helps. Usual disclaimers apply: your experience may differ, flying airplanes can kill you, void where prohibited, licensed drivers only, and caveat emptor. Fred in Florida ---------- > From: William W. Lorier > To: Fred I. Mahan > Subject: Re: [canard-aviators] lead fouling > Date: Wednesday, November 12, 1997 1:13 AM > > Fred I. Mahan wrote: > > > > [The Canard Aviators's Mailing list] > > Wes, why not just use Amoco low-test unleaded? No leading problems > > whatsoever. > > > > Fred in Florida > > > > --------- > Hi Fred > > I am still a bit afraid to put auto gas in my tank because I still > remember Burt's disclaimer since he didn't test for it in the structure. > The decision is more often a factor of availability, and here in > Washington State, at least, 100LL is it...I'm not schlepping a gas can > into town. Your experience with autogas in the composite structure > would be of interest to me. I use it in my Subaru powered Avid Flyer > and have used it in other things but am concerned about any possible > degredation of the EZ structure....I just don't know. Don't even know > if Amoco is up here, but I do the alchohol test on premium unleaded from > the local stations and use what tests without in the Avid. Works great. From: GeneKnapp2@aol.com Date: Thu, 4 Dec 1997 09:27:56 -0500 (EST) Subject: COZY: Horsepower Hey Guys I was looking at the specs for an engine for which thw manufacturer listed (and rightly so ) the power in ft-lbs @ an RPM. I seem to remember that horsepower is just a numerical multiplier with some constants, and the torque at a certian RPM. Does anyone know this formula? Gene GeneKnapp2@aol.com From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: COZY: Horsepower (fwd) Date: Thu, 4 Dec 97 10:25:49 EST Gene Knapp asks: >I was looking at the specs for an engine for which thw manufacturer >listed (and rightly so ) the power in ft-lbs @ an RPM. I seem to remember >that horsepower is just a numerical multiplier with some constants, and >the torque at a certian RPM. Does anyone know this formula? Without going into the derivation, it's: Torque x RPM HP = -------------- 5252.113 Where Torque is measured in ft-lb. It sure is easier to use kW :-). -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com by post.larc.nasa.gov (8.8.6.1/pohub4.2) with SMTP id KAA22222; Thu, 4 Dec 1997 10:47:39 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 04 Dec 1997 10:43:29 -0500 From: Paul Krasa Subject: Re: COZY: Horsepower At 09:27 12/4/97 -0500, GeneKnapp2@aol.com wrote: >Hey Guys > >I was looking at the specs for an engine for which thw manufacturer >listed (and rightly so ) the power in ft-lbs @ an RPM. I seem to remember >that horsepower is just a numerical multiplier with some constants, and >the torque at a certian RPM. Does anyone know this formula? > >Gene GeneKnapp2@aol.com > > Ft-lbs are a unit of energy and HP is a unit of power. The difference is energy is the physical capability of doing work and power is the rate at which work is performed. The product of energy and RPM is power. The units of energy are (mass * distance^2)/time^2 and RPM is 2 pi radiuns (sp?)/time. Thus the product of the two is (mass * distance^2)/time^3 which is power. To convert from ft-lbs @ an RPM. 5252(hp) T= -------- ft-lbs N where: T = torque N = RPM Date: Tue, 30 Dec 1997 11:20:13 -0500 From: Bulent Subject: COZY: Mazda Rotary Hi all, I would like to ask if anyone knows of a discussion group, email list or a web site related to Mazda rotary conversions. Something similar to this great place for exchange of information, ideas and sometime hot air :-) Have a Happy New Year! From: riphall@digitalexp.com (Hall, Elmer T.) Subject: COZY: Re: [canard-aviators] Mazda Rotary Date: Tue, 30 Dec 1997 19:54:28 -0600 ROTARY AVIATION NEWS is a good source for some good info. writen by Tracy Crook, address 71175.606@compuserve.com Elmer Hall Eracer #129 (Mazdz 13B Airflow injectors, crook elec. ign, Ross refduction gear). ---------- > From: Bulent > To: Canard Aviators > Cc: Cozy Builders > Subject: [canard-aviators] Mazda Rotary > Date: Tuesday, December 30, 1997 4:57 PM > > [The Canard Aviators's Mailing list] > Hi all, > I would like to ask if anyone knows of a discussion group, email list or > a web site related to Mazda rotary conversions. Something similar to > this great place for exchange of information, ideas and sometime hot air > :-) > Have a Happy New Year! > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > (c) 1997 Canard Aviators. This information is provided solely and > exclusively for the personal use of Canard aircraft builders and Pilots > and may not be used, copied, quoted or referenced in any other publication > or medium without the express written consent of Canard Aviators > support@canard.com.