From: KR-net users group digest[SMTP:kr-net@telelists.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 1999 12:34 AM To: kr-net digest recipients Subject: kr-net digest: May 04, 1999 KR-net users group Digest for Tuesday, May 04, 1999. 1. progress update 2. Re: progress update 3. Re: progress update 4. tailpost woes 5. tailpost corrections 6. Re: tailpost woes 7. Re: tailpost woes 8. Re: tailpost corrections 9. Re: lights? 10. progress update 11. Tidbit - Waterproofing Electrical Wire Splices 12. Re: progress update 13. Sport Aviation 14. Cheap Brakes! 15. Re: progress update 16. REQ: KRNet Head & SOOBHeads advice 17. Re: Sport Aviation 18. Re: progress update 19. Re: progress update 20. Re: REQ: KRNet Head & SOOBHeads advice 21. Re: REQ: KRNet Head & SOOBHeads advice 22. engines 23. Re: Love that fiberglass 24. Re: REQ: KRNet Head & SOOBHeads advice 25. Somthing for online FAQ??? 26. Re: engines 27. Re: REQ: KRNet Head & SOOBHeads advice ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: progress update From: "Richard Parker" Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 03:00:10 PDT X-Message-Number: 1 With an eight week old and a 2 year old progress has been slow lately. Theres a definate struggle when I've got a spare minute deciding wether to go out to the garage or back to bed. fortunately I think sleeping is a waste of good building time so the garage is winning out. This weekend I counted up all the 3/16 holes I drilled. a little over 150. I finished the center section WAF's and made a jig for drilling the spars holes for the WAF's The jig was simple. I took a peice of 4130 tubing that had a id a little smaller than 3/16 and drilled it out with a nice new 3/16 bit. then I drilled a hole in a 1.5 x 4 x 1 peice of pine to about the same OD as the 4130 on the drill press. then I knocked the 4130 into the pine, cut off the extra, ran the drill back through to clean off the burrs. I marked each side of the jig so I knew to always drill throught the jig in the same direction. I still have the rear spar to drill. I held a WAF on the front of the spar and drilled each mounting hole to about 1/2 inch deep, removed the waf, put the drill jig over the bit, inserted the bit into the hole, slid the jig up flat up against the spar and C-clamped it tight and finished drilling each hole. every hole was dead on, I held a waf against the opposite side and ran the bit back through just to clean up the very small splinters splinters on the back side of the plywood. Having made the WAF's myself by drilling them 8 at a time it is a good idea to put an indexing mark on one side of the waf so that when you install them you put the indexing mark in the same relative location (ie up and facing forward) Then any deviation from your datum is equal accross all wafs and your bolts holes will line up. Maybe LLC will supply a drill jig for you guys that buy their waf's? Just a peice of 3/4 mild steel plate with a 3/16 hole drilled through would be necessary I also put a cross brace directly below the seat back rest so that you can lean on it when getting in and out. Also installed the inner plywood airfoils to the stub wings. outer will be done as soon as the rear wafs are installed (any day now) Question? anyone using an aeleron pushrod from a forward spar mounted bellcrank instead of cabling to a rear spar mounted bellcrank? I'd like to see a picture. Rich Parker _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: progress update From: "Mark Langford" Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 06:06:38 -0500 X-Message-Number: 2 Rich Parker wrote: >Question? anyone using an aeleron pushrod from a forward spar mounted >bellcrank instead of cabling to a rear spar mounted bellcrank? I'd like to >see a picture. See http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/kcontrol.html for several. My pushrod is .75" ID 4130 tubing using the standard rod ends from Wicks riveted in place. Mine goes under the aft spar (thanks to my 1 degree of root incidence), but it could just as easily go thru a hole in the middle of the spar, avoiding the vertical spruce members in the web. For several pictures of a WAF drilling fixture like Rich mentioned, see my outer wing details at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/owings.html . Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: progress update From: "Richard Parker" Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 05:46:26 PDT X-Message-Number: 3 I didnt even make the "U" shape, I just used one flat side >From: "Mark Langford" >For several pictures of a WAF drilling fixture like Rich mentioned, see my >outer wing details at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/owings.html . _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: tailpost woes From: "Oscar Zuniga" Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 05:42:38 PDT X-Message-Number: 4 Don't feel too bad about forgetting the plywood doublers on your tailpost, Haris. I just was over to Rick Junkin's page (hadn't been there for a while) and on his project page I see he did the same thing. Hope I don't forget that when tailpost time comes for me! PS- thanks to all for the Corvair selection tips. Best tip I got was to wait till I can find one for _free_. Seems they are available if you just look in the right places... Oscar Zuniga Medford, Oregon website at http://www.geocities.com/Pipeline/Dropzone/5610/ _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: tailpost corrections From: "Mark Langford" Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 09:11:02 -0500 X-Message-Number: 5 TailHeads, A quick fix for a non-vertical tailpost is to scab on some of those long skinny tapered leftovers that were created during horizontal stabilizer construction. Out of all those pieces (or those from the main or aft spar) you should be able to find one that's tapered perfectly that will correct your deviation. After it's glued on, mark a straight line on front and back of the other side (the one that has too much material now) and and use a belt sander to quickly remove material down to the line. How do I know? It's just about impossible for the tail post to end up vertical after pulling those two sides of the boat together, especially if you want the plywood to overlap the post (which you do)... Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: tailpost woes From: "Richard Parker" Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 07:14:23 PDT X-Message-Number: 6 If I were you all I'd also put on on the forward tailpost where the cable (or pushrod) hole is going to be drilled. It will prevent any possibility of cracking. Rich Parker >From: "Oscar Zuniga" >Reply-To: "KR-net users group" >To: "KR-net users group" >Subject: [kr-net] tailpost woes >Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 05:42:38 PDT > >Don't feel too bad about forgetting the plywood doublers on your tailpost, >Haris. I just was over to Rick Junkin's page (hadn't been there for a >while) and on his project page I see he did the same thing. Hope I don't >forget that when tailpost time comes for me! > >PS- thanks to all for the Corvair selection tips. Best tip I got was to >wait till I can find one for _free_. Seems they are available if you just >look in the right places... > >Oscar Zuniga >Medford, Oregon >website at http://www.geocities.com/Pipeline/Dropzone/5610/ > > >_______________________________________________________________ >Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com > >--- >You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: richontheroad@hotmail.com >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: tailpost woes From: HAshraf@aol.com Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 10:50:44 EDT X-Message-Number: 7 In a message dated 99-05-04 09:16:30 EDT, you write: << Don't feel too bad about forgetting the plywood doublers on your tailpost, Haris. I just was over to Rick Junkin's page (hadn't been there for a while) and on his project page I see he did the same thing. Hope I don't forget that when tailpost time comes for me >> Temprature was falling in a hurry and I was trying to hurry up. Three days later I found a rudder spar with the doubler in the wood pile and figured out what I have done. Haris ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: tailpost corrections From: HAshraf@aol.com Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 11:08:02 EDT X-Message-Number: 8 In a message dated 99-05-04 10:24:03 EDT, you write: << A quick fix for a non-vertical tailpost is to scab on some of those long skinny tapered leftovers that were created during horizontal stabilizer construction. Out of all those pieces (or those from the main or aft spar) you should be able to find one that's tapered perfectly that will correct your deviation. After it's glued on, mark a straight line on front and back of the other side (the one that has too much material now) and and use a belt sander to quickly remove material down to the line. How do I know? It's just about impossible for the tail post to end up vertical after pulling those two sides of the boat together, especially if you want the plywood to overlap the post (which you do).. >> Its a pretty good idea once the fuselage is pretty complete. Otherwise we get four chances to get things straight. We have to remember that we need to twist the fuselage a skosh to correct any discrepencies. First when the tail post is installed, Second when the stabilizer brace is attached (where I am right now) then when the turtledeck is attached (It has to be pretty stiff like from RR or dual walled using Marks method) and last when the torsional V braces are attached. I remember some one posted a another way which was to pull the top tip of the rudder opposite to the lilt before glassing it. I get another chance as I haven't skinned the rear bottom of my fuselage. That piece goes after the aft deck and elevator has been installed. The air probably does not care about a couple of degree tilt in the fin as long it is parallel to the flow. I suppose the torque of all the big engines that are bieng put up front will twist the fuselage so fin will never be verticle. Haris ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: lights? From: "Jim Sellars" Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 12:34:57 -0300 X-Message-Number: 9 Mike; I have a question for you . I'm about to finish this beast of mine and agree with some of the things you have suggested here about strakes on the hoizontal sabilizer. That's what I'm thinking about using, however I had a thought the other evening which gave me some cause to consider more, what about the strakes bloking out the rudder in a spin ? Any comments friend ? Regards Jim -----Original Message----- From: Mike Mims To: KR-net users group Date: May 1, 1999 1:25 PM Subject: [kr-net] lights? >Check out these lights > >http://www.terf.com/terflight.htm > > >-- >zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz >Micheal Mims >Ailerons almost done! >http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/4136/ >Aliso Viejo CA >Give Blood, Play Hockey! >^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >--- >You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: jsellars@mon.auracom.com >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: progress update From: William Zorc <73101.157@compuserve.com> Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 13:08:08 -0400 X-Message-Number: 10 Rich, I built up a pushrod aileron system over twenty years ago (no, that's not a misprint) for my still-continuing KR-2 project. I have recently rebuilt the support brackets, which became necessary when I decided I wanted to add flaps. I do not have current photos, but will try to get them when I get home from my current trip next week or so.(I fly 727's for UPS) I used a bandsaw with an aluminum-cutting blade to cut angle-aluminum that I bought from RR. (It was the 4 inch by 4 inch piece that is used for the upper firewall support.) It has absolutely no flexing, very stiff, and lightweight. Bill Zorc 73101.157@compuserve.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Tidbit - Waterproofing Electrical Wire Splices From: BSHADR@aol.com Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 13:14:11 EDT X-Message-Number: 11 KRNetheads: I came across this on another list. Enjoy... Randy Stein Soviet Monica, CA BSHADR@aol.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Tidbit - Waterproofing Electrical Splices Anyone that has ever taken a "butt splice" apart that has been exposed to the weather will remember the GREEN WIRE. RIGHT? Any way for the trick, dig out your old Hot Glue Gun, a Glass of Water, and Squirt a 1/6" +or- string into the water. The next time you want to make a water tight "butt splice", do the but splice as normal but put a 2" long piece of Heat Shrink Tube on the wire first. Then cut a 2" long piece of the glue (Dry not with water) slide the tube over the but splice , insert the glue string, and heat. Not only do you have a water tight "butt splice" but you also have a splice that is less likely to pull apart. There also is a double wall heat shrink made that serves the same function, only better. AeroElectric has it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: progress update From: "Richard Parker" Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 13:13:43 PDT X-Message-Number: 12 I'd love to see it. I can scan and post pictures for you if you dont have the ability. Thanks, Rich Parker >From: William Zorc <73101.157@compuserve.com> >Reply-To: "KR-net users group" >To: "KR-net users group" >Subject: [kr-net] progress update >Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 13:08:08 -0400 > >Rich, > >I built up a pushrod aileron system over twenty years ago (no, that's not a >misprint) for my still-continuing KR-2 project. I have recently rebuilt >the support brackets, which became necessary when I decided I wanted to add >flaps. I do not have current photos, but will try to get them when I get >home from my current trip next week or so.(I fly 727's for UPS) I used a >bandsaw with an aluminum-cutting blade to cut angle-aluminum that I bought >from RR. (It was the 4 inch by 4 inch piece that is used for the upper >firewall support.) It has absolutely no flexing, very stiff, and >lightweight. > >Bill Zorc >73101.157@compuserve.com > >--- >You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: richontheroad@hotmail.com >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Sport Aviation From: "Richard Parker" Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 14:07:05 PDT X-Message-Number: 13 I snatched Don Reids old Sport Aviation files from the 70's and put them in .pdf (adobe acrobat) format since he said they would only be temporarily available. I have also zipped them. If anyone would like them let me know and I'll send you an e-mail privately. There are 44 pages total (1.2M) interesting reading. BTW Don, I didnt see a couple of the newer articles. Troy Petteway, Bobby muse and Tom Crawford. Rich Parker _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Cheap Brakes! From: "Richard Parker" Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 16:22:55 PDT X-Message-Number: 14 I just received a pair of mechanical disc brakes that were REALLY inexpensive and would handle KR type aircraft. I paid $8.95 each! they are real small, have 1-1/8 diameter pucks and weigh 8.5 ounces each. I havent decided if I'm going to use them or Hyd but for that price I'll make something that can use them. I've got a few real small hydraulic cylinders that I might have actuate the lever arm. I'll post the info on my web page or if you are interested sooner let me know. Rich Parker richontheroad@hotmail.com http://top.monad.net/~theparkers/kr.htm Jaffrey, NH _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: progress update From: Mike Mims Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 17:24:27 -0700 X-Message-Number: 15 Richard Parker wrote: > > Question? anyone using an aeleron pushrod from a forward spar mounted > bellcrank instead of cabling to a rear spar mounted bellcrank? I'd like to see a picture.>>>>>> There seems to be a pretty big infatuation on the KRNet concerning the KR control system and the use of push rods over cables. You may want to step back and think about why you would rather have push rods versus cables. If you are looking at it from a safety standpoint keep in mind that push rods have a single point failure whereas cables are usually connected in two places. Its just my opinion but push rod systems on an airplane the caliber of the KR is a complete waste of time and money. Remember its only my opinion so don't take it to heart. -- zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Micheal Mims Ailerons almost done! http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/4136/ Aliso Viejo CA Give Blood, Play Hockey! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: REQ: KRNet Head & SOOBHeads advice From: "Rick Hubka" Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 18:51:39 -0600 X-Message-Number: 16 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0042_01BE965F.24B5B420 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi KRNet Heads & SOOBHeads I have the opportunity to purchased a EA-81 for my KR-2S from a fellow = up here in Canada. Below is some of the info. Cost =3D $2K U.S. It still needs an intake and exhast system and I am concerned about 1.87 = PSRU. I don't know what prop speed it would give me or if it would be = appropriate for a KR. ----------------- From Seller... The engine is rebuilt and includes new pistons, camshaft, and lifters. = The crank was magnafluxed and polished. Cylinder heads had valve grinds = which included new seats and guides. The machine work was done at = Thompsons Automotive Machine. I have included a URL for the manufacturer = of the PSRU for you to check out. The one I have is new and was ordered = from them. The gear reduction on this one is 1.87 to 1 and has the lower = support bearing. I have not run the engine as I have not made up an = intake system for it. I was originally going to put it on a Beaver = ultralight but $#@$#&! it was to heavy so it is now in storage in my = basement. I also have a small 40 amp Nippon Denso alternator for it and = the stock intake manifold if wanted. Also the books and video put out by = Reductions Ltd. =20 http://www.mts.net/~davejohn/index.html -------------------- Can any of you suggest: 1) Is 1.87 PSRU OK for a KR-2S (No I don't know what type of prop I = would use) 2) Does this sound like a fair deal? 3) what questions can I ask the seller to make a better decision? 4) what??? Thanks.. in advance... Rick Hubka rick@hubka.com Calgary, Alberta Canada ------=_NextPart_000_0042_01BE965F.24B5B420 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi KRNet Heads & SOOBHeads
 
I have the opportunity to purchased a EA-81 for my = KR-2S from=20 a fellow up here in Canada.  Below is some of the info.  Cost=20 =3D $2K U.S.
It still needs an intake and exhast system and I am = concerned=20 about 1.87 PSRU.  I don't know what prop speed it would give me or = if it=20 would be appropriate for a KR.
-----------------
From Seller...
The engine is rebuilt and includes new pistons, = camshaft, and=20 lifters. The crank was magnafluxed and polished. Cylinder heads had = valve grinds=20 which included new seats and guides. The machine work was done at = Thompsons=20 Automotive Machine. I have included a URL for the manufacturer of the = PSRU for=20 you to check out. The one I have is new and was ordered from them. The = gear=20 reduction on this one is 1.87 to 1 and has the lower support bearing. I = have not=20 run the engine as I have not made up an intake system for it. I was = originally=20 going to put it on a Beaver ultralight but $#@$#&! it was to heavy = so it is=20 now in storage in my basement. I also have a small 40 amp Nippon = Denso=20 alternator for it and the stock intake manifold if wanted. Also the = books and=20 video put out by Reductions Ltd. 
http://www.mts.net/~dave= john/index.html
--------------------
 
Can any of you suggest:
1) Is 1.87 PSRU OK for a KR-2S (No I don't know what = type of=20 prop I would use)
2) Does this sound like a fair deal?
3) what questions can I ask the seller to make a = better=20 decision?
4) what???
 
Thanks.. in advance...
 
Rick Hubka
rick@hubka.com
Calgary,=20 Alberta    Canada
------=_NextPart_000_0042_01BE965F.24B5B420-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Sport Aviation From: Donald Reid Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 21:07:15 -0400 X-Message-Number: 17 Richard Parker wrote: > > I snatched Don Reids old Sport Aviation files from the 70's and put them in > .pdf (adobe acrobat) format since he said they would only be temporarily > available. > BTW Don, I didnt see a couple of the newer articles. Troy Petteway, Bobby > muse and Tom Crawford. > I have all of them, a total of about 15. I did not put them all on the website at once due to the size. I guess I will have to upload the next installment soon. -- Don Reid Bumpass, Va. mailto:donreid@erols.com KR2XL at http://www.erols.com/donreid/kr_page.htm Ultralights at http://www.erols.com/donreid/usua250.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: progress update From: "Dean Collette" Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 20:16:06 -0500 X-Message-Number: 18 Where Mike has a good point, let me add a couple of other things for consideration. Pushrod controls, overall, are heavier then the corresponding cable system, and that includes the pulleys and brackets required for the cables. But pushrods will eliminate the need for the large area that the cables do. For example; If you use the standard KR type cable system for the elevator, the you need to have two cables attached to the control stick about 6" (if memory serves) apart. These cables then extend aft, cross somewhere in the middle of the aft fuselage, and connect to the 6" bellcrank on the elevator. With a pushrod system, there is the single pushrod that runs, in the middle and below the level of the seats. This would eliminate that cable that runs at just about the same level as your right elbow. The combination of pushrod and cable (like many people use) tries to get the best from both worlds. The pushrod runs as before, but is connected to a bellcrank - cable system on the aft spar. The cables then run back to the elevator or another pushrod in the tail. This reduces the weight of the long pushrod that would have to run the entire length. The last consideration is that of cable stretch. Over time the cables need to be adjusted - that's why they have turnbuckles. The pushrods, once properly adjusted, are there for the duration. The same thing applies to the ailerons. If you have the room for a cable system and are willing to readjust the cables as needed - fine. For me, I find that cables for the ailerons complicate things a bit - too many parts that are willing to fail on you. It's easier to devise a system where one piece of hardware does the pushing and pulling. The simplicity of a pushrod is hard to beat. Dean Collette Milwaukee, Wisconsin mailto:drdean@execpc.com Web Page at http://www.execpc.com/~drdean/home.htm -----Original Message----- From: Mike Mims To: KR-net users group Date: Tuesday, May 04, 1999 7:27 PM Subject: [kr-net] Re: progress update >Richard Parker wrote: >> >> Question? anyone using an aeleron pushrod from a forward spar mounted >> bellcrank instead of cabling to a rear spar mounted bellcrank? I'd like to see a picture.>>>>>> > > >There seems to be a pretty big infatuation on the KRNet concerning the >KR control system and the use of push rods over cables. You may want to >step back and think about why you would rather have push rods versus >cables. If you are looking at it from a safety standpoint keep in mind >that push rods have a single point failure whereas cables are usually >connected in two places. Its just my opinion but push rod systems on an >airplane the caliber of the KR is a complete waste of time and money. >Remember its only my opinion so don't take it to heart. > > >-- >zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz >Micheal Mims >Ailerons almost done! >http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/4136/ >Aliso Viejo CA >Give Blood, Play Hockey! >^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >--- >You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: drdean@execpc.com >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: progress update From: EveninBrz@aol.com Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 20:48:22 EDT X-Message-Number: 19 In a message dated 5/4/1999 11:18:44 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 73101.157@compuserve.com writes: << I built up a pushrod aileron system over twenty years ago (no, that's not a misprint) for my still-continuing KR-2 project. >> I for one would be very much intrested in seeing pictures of the pushrod aileron system. Thanks, Larry Shull EveninBrz@aol.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: REQ: KRNet Head & SOOBHeads advice From: jscott.pilot@juno.com Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 19:55:40 -0700 X-Message-Number: 20 Rick, That reduction unit is about $1800 US, so he's just about giving you the engine. The reduction (1.87) depends on what RPM you want to turn the engine. I don't remember which of the pulleys you change to modify the reduction ratio, but it's reasonably simple. The Reductions, Inc PRSU appears to be a decent redrive. See JEB's web page for a look at that reduction unit with a 3 blade Warp drive prop mounted to a turbod EA-81 powerplant on a KR-2S. http://www.thuntek.net/~jeb/krpage.htm JEB isn't flying yet, but he does have the engine running now and is finalizing the wiring harness, etc. May even be ready for some taxi testing sometime this summer. At 4500 rpm, the prop would be turning 2406 RPM. At 5000, the prop would be turning 2673 rpm. With a 60" prop you're going to be in the ballpark for decent efficiency from the prop. FWIW, the Continental on my KR-2S is swinging a 60 diameter prop at 2550 RPM. I'm not displeased with the results. Regards, Jeff Scott - Los Alamos, NM mailto:jscott.pilot@juno.com See N1213w construction and first flight at http://www.thuntek.net/~jeb/krjeff.htm On Tue, 4 May 1999 18:51:39 -0600 "Rick Hubka" writes: >Hi KRNet Heads & SOOBHeads > >I have the opportunity to purchased a EA-81 for my KR-2S from a fellow >up here in Canada. Below is some of the info. Cost = $2K U.S. >It still needs an intake and exhast system and I am concerned about >1.87 PSRU. I don't know what prop speed it would give me or if it >would be appropriate for a KR. >----------------- >From Seller... >The engine is rebuilt and includes new pistons, camshaft, and lifters. >The crank was magnafluxed and polished. Cylinder heads had valve >grinds which included new seats and guides. The machine work was done >at Thompsons Automotive Machine. I have included a URL for the >manufacturer of the PSRU for you to check out. The one I have is new >and was ordered from them. The gear reduction on this one is 1.87 to 1 >and has the lower support bearing. I have not run the engine as I have >not made up an intake system for it. I was originally going to put it >on a Beaver ultralight but $#@$#&! it was to heavy so it is now in >storage in my basement. I also have a small 40 amp Nippon Denso >alternator for it and the stock intake manifold if wanted. Also the >books and video put out by Reductions Ltd. >http://www.mts.net/~davejohn/index.html >-------------------- > >Can any of you suggest: >1) Is 1.87 PSRU OK for a KR-2S (No I don't know what type of prop I >would use) >2) Does this sound like a fair deal? >3) what questions can I ask the seller to make a better decision? >4) what??? > >Thanks.. in advance... > >Rick Hubka >rick@hubka.com >Calgary, Alberta Canada ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: REQ: KRNet Head & SOOBHeads advice From: Mike Mims Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 19:20:28 -0700 X-Message-Number: 21 > Rick Hubka wrote: > > Also the books and video put out by Reductions Ltd. > http://www.mts.net/~davejohn/index.html > -------------------- First thing you want to do is follow up with Dave Johnson at Reductions. His first generation PRSU had a bad prop shaft and it will need to be replaced or it will fail. Second look for a direct drive Subaru if you really got to have one. PRSU Subarus are heavy for their power output. Besides with the reduction unit you will NEVER get the prop up to the speed it needs to perform. With that ratio your looking at a max possible prop speed of 2900 rpm (that's assuming you can get the engine up to 5500 RPM) and that aint gonna cut it with a 54 inch prop. With the engine running at its normal maximum operational RPM range (4500 or so) you are looking at a prop RPM of about 2300. can you say 100 MPH KR? Again its only my opinion! :o) -- zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Micheal Mims Ailerons almost done! http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/4136/ Aliso Viejo CA Give Blood, Play Hockey! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: engines From: CHolder280@aol.com Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 22:40:58 EDT X-Message-Number: 22 While were on the subject of engines, any of you out there no anything about Mosler engines? I know they are out of business, but I would like to know more about the engines and if there are any concerns I should have about installing one in my KR-2. If you know of any information that could help please e-mail me at < cholder280@aol.com.> Thanks in advance, Chuck, ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Love that fiberglass From: "Austin and Connie Clark" Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 22:00:14 -0500 X-Message-Number: 23 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01BE9679.7CE76020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > I am glad to see the response on the construction of my tank. I = removed the=20 > mold tonight and agree the two layers of 5.85 BID alone are not = enough for=20 > the weight of the 18 gallons estimted. I will be installing a minimum = of two=20 > baffels 1/2 thick covered with two layers each side. These will be = from=20 > bottom to top and glassed in place front to back and spaced evenly to = make=20 > three like compartments. Also the tank will sit on the top and bottom = shelves=20 > on the aft firewall. The side walls will have exterior bracing where I = intend=20 > to install piano hinge front to back at the upper longeron in order to = make=20 > the tank removable. What do you think? >=20 > Live to build and build to fly. > Mark Jones (N886MJ) > flykr2s@aol.com =20 Mark, I think it is a good idea to make the tank removeable. Two layers of = 5.85 BID may not be enough though based on my cowling and front deck = which was glassed with 3 layers of 6 oz. BID. They turned out to be = rather flimsy when I removed them from the mold. I have added some = glass bands at each end of the front deck along with a joggle at the = firewall end and a bulkhead which will later be trimmed down to a flange = for mounting the instrument panel. This stiffened it up a lot so your = baffles should have a similiar effect. =20 I am building my header tank now also but I am using the foam core = technique. Actually, I took my original front deck and cut it in half. = The two pieces were glassed together to form a basic oval shape. Using = more foam, I shaped it so the front of it forms around the upper shelf = at the firewall. I plan to mount it with piano hinges on the longerons = and am thinking about glassing in an aluminum tab on the front of the = tank that would attach to another aluminum tab bolted to either the top = shelf or the firewall. You can see pictures of it at = www.datasync.com/~itac/fuelsys.htm Austin Clark KR2S Pascagoula, M=20 ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01BE9679.7CE76020 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > = I am glad to=20 see the response on the construction of my tank. I removed the
> = mold=20 tonight and agree the two layers of  5.85 BID alone are not enough = for=20
> the weight of the 18 gallons estimted. I will be installing a = minimum=20 of two
> baffels 1/2 thick covered with two layers each side. = These will=20 be from
> bottom to top and glassed in place front to back and = spaced=20 evenly to make
> three like compartments. Also the tank will sit = on the=20 top and bottom shelves
> on the aft firewall. The side walls will = have=20 exterior bracing where I intend
> to install piano hinge front to = back at=20 the upper longeron in order to make
> the tank removable. What do = you=20 think?
>
> Live to build and build to fly.
> Mark = Jones=20 (N886MJ)
> flykr2s@aol.com
 
Mark,

I think it = is a good=20 idea to make the tank removeable.  Two layers of 5.85 BID  may = not be=20 enough though based on my cowling and front deck which was glassed with = 3 layers=20 of 6 oz. BID.  They turned out to be rather flimsy when I removed = them from=20 the mold.  I have added some glass bands at each end of the front = deck=20 along with a joggle at the firewall end and a bulkhead which will later = be=20 trimmed down to a flange for mounting the instrument panel.  This = stiffened=20 it up a lot so your baffles should have a similiar effect.  =

I am=20 building my header tank now also but I am using the foam core = technique. =20 Actually, I took my original front deck and cut it in half.  The = two pieces=20 were glassed together to form a basic oval shape.  Using more foam, = I=20 shaped it so the front of it forms around the upper shelf at the = firewall. =20 I plan to mount it with piano hinges on the longerons and am thinking = about=20 glassing in an aluminum tab on the front of the tank that would attach = to=20 another aluminum tab bolted to either the top shelf or the firewall. You = can see=20 pictures of it at www.datasync.com/~itac/fuelsys.htm

Austin=20 Clark
KR2S
Pascagoula, M
------=_NextPart_000_000C_01BE9679.7CE76020-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: REQ: KRNet Head & SOOBHeads advice From: Mike Mims Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 22:16:44 -0700 X-Message-Number: 24 jscott.pilot@juno.com wrote: > > Rick, > > That reduction unit is about $1800 US, so he's just about giving you the engine. The reduction (1.87) depends on what RPM you want to turn the engine. >>>> Jeff brings up some interesting points. Buy the engine, sell the PSRU and get the parts to build up a direct drive turbo! :o) Of course if you keep the PSRU you could always add a turbo and be in the big time! -- zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Micheal Mims Ailerons almost done! http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/4136/ Aliso Viejo CA Give Blood, Play Hockey! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Somthing for online FAQ??? From: Mike Mims Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 23:58:44 -0700 X-Message-Number: 25 FAQ Guys,....Check this out and if you like it feel free to use it. http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/4136/slideshow.html -- zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Micheal Mims Ailerons almost done! http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/4136/ Aliso Viejo CA Give Blood, Play Hockey! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: engines From: "R.W. Moore" Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 03:04:09 -0400 X-Message-Number: 26 Mosler is in Florida somewhere under a new name, I have been told. While Tex Taylor (HAPI ENGINES) was with the company they were good engines. The company cliped Rex and he and his son Patrick left. -----Original Message----- From: CHolder280@aol.com To: KR-net users group Date: Tuesday, May 04, 1999 11:06 PM Subject: [kr-net] engines >While were on the subject of engines, any of you out there no anything about >Mosler engines? I know they are out of business, but I would like to know >more about the engines and if there are any concerns I should have about >installing one in my KR-2. >If you know of any information that could help please e-mail me at > > < cholder280@aol.com.> > > > Thanks in advance, > > Chuck, > >--- >You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: rwmoore@alltel.net >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: REQ: KRNet Head & SOOBHeads advice From: "Martin Mulvey" Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 00:19:45 -0700 X-Message-Number: 27 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0030_01BE968C.FA8EC140 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Rick and all, I would stay with a 2.2 : 1 PSRU for the drive unit. The 1.87 is not = enough to develop the HP. BRGDS, Marty ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Rick Hubka=20 To: KR-net users group=20 Sent: 04 May, 1999 17:51 Subject: [kr-net] REQ: KRNet Head & SOOBHeads advice Hi KRNet Heads & SOOBHeads I have the opportunity to purchased a EA-81 for my KR-2S from a fellow = up here in Canada. Below is some of the info. Cost =3D $2K U.S. It still needs an intake and exhast system and I am concerned about = 1.87 PSRU. I don't know what prop speed it would give me or if it would = be appropriate for a KR. ----------------- From Seller... The engine is rebuilt and includes new pistons, camshaft, and lifters. = The crank was magnafluxed and polished. Cylinder heads had valve grinds = which included new seats and guides. The machine work was done at = Thompsons Automotive Machine. I have included a URL for the manufacturer = of the PSRU for you to check out. The one I have is new and was ordered = from them. The gear reduction on this one is 1.87 to 1 and has the lower = support bearing. I have not run the engine as I have not made up an = intake system for it. I was originally going to put it on a Beaver = ultralight but $#@$#&! it was to heavy so it is now in storage in my = basement. I also have a small 40 amp Nippon Denso alternator for it and = the stock intake manifold if wanted. Also the books and video put out by = Reductions Ltd. =20 http://www.mts.net/~davejohn/index.html -------------------- Can any of you suggest: 1) Is 1.87 PSRU OK for a KR-2S (No I don't know what type of prop I = would use) 2) Does this sound like a fair deal? 3) what questions can I ask the seller to make a better decision? 4) what??? Thanks.. in advance... Rick Hubka rick@hubka.com Calgary, Alberta Canada ------=_NextPart_000_0030_01BE968C.FA8EC140 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Rick and all,
 
I would stay with a 2.2 : 1 PSRU for the drive unit. = The 1.87=20 is not enough to develop the HP.
 
BRGDS,   Marty
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Rick = Hubka
Sent: 04 May, 1999 17:51
Subject: [kr-net] REQ: KRNet = Head &=20 SOOBHeads advice

Hi KRNet Heads & SOOBHeads
 
I have the opportunity to purchased a EA-81 for my = KR-2S=20 from a fellow up here in Canada.  Below is some of the = info.  Cost=20 =3D $2K U.S.
It still needs an intake and exhast system and I = am=20 concerned about 1.87 PSRU.  I don't know what prop speed it would = give me=20 or if it would be appropriate for a KR.
-----------------
From Seller...
The engine is rebuilt and includes new pistons, = camshaft,=20 and lifters. The crank was magnafluxed and polished. Cylinder heads = had valve=20 grinds which included new seats and guides. The machine work was done = at=20 Thompsons Automotive Machine. I have included a URL for the = manufacturer of=20 the PSRU for you to check out. The one I have is new and was ordered = from=20 them. The gear reduction on this one is 1.87 to 1 and has the lower = support=20 bearing. I have not run the engine as I have not made up an intake = system for=20 it. I was originally going to put it on a Beaver ultralight but = $#@$#&! it=20 was to heavy so it is now in storage in my basement. I also = have a small=20 40 amp Nippon Denso alternator for it and the stock intake manifold if = wanted.=20 Also the books and video put out by Reductions Ltd.  =
http://www.mts.net/~dave= john/index.html
--------------------
 
Can any of you suggest:
1) Is 1.87 PSRU OK for a KR-2S (No I don't know = what type of=20 prop I would use)
2) Does this sound like a fair deal?
3) what questions can I ask the seller to make a = better=20 decision?
4) what???
 
Thanks.. in advance...
 
Rick Hubka
rick@hubka.com
Calgary,=20 Alberta    = Canada
------=_NextPart_000_0030_01BE968C.FA8EC140-- --- END OF DIGEST --- You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: johnbou@timberline.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com