From: KR-net users group digest[SMTP:kr-net@telelists.com] Sent: Sunday, August 08, 1999 12:22 AM To: kr-net digest recipients Subject: kr-net digest: August 07, 1999 KR-net users group Digest for Saturday, August 07, 1999. 1. More Superfil Questions 2. Re: More Superfil Questions 3. postal scales 4. Re: postal scales 5. Question. 6. Re: More Superfil Questions 7. Re: Question. 8. Re: 2180 Less Reliable? 9. Re: postal scales 10. Re: Question. 11. Re: 2180 Less Reliable? 12. Re: 2180 Less Reliable, or Corvair not popular? 13. Re: Question. 14. Re: 2180 Less Reliable, or Corvair not popular? 15. Re: oshkosh 16. Re: postal scales 17. HAPI Magnum 75 18. Re: HAPI Magnum 75 19. Re: HAPI Magnum 75 20. Re: HAPI Magnum 75 21. Re: 2180 Less Reliable? 22. Re: postal scales 23. Re: 2180 Less Reliable, or Corvair not popular? 24. Re: postal scales 25. Re: 2180 Less Reliable? 26. Re: Corvair size 27. Re: lexan 28. Re: 2180 Less Reliable? 29. oshkosh-i was there 30. Re: 2180 Less Reliable, or Corvair not popular? 31. KRNet Awards 32. KRNet & The Gathering ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: More Superfil Questions From: "Tobin Dunham" Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1999 04:30:58 PDT X-Message-Number: 1 Ok, let me get this straight. Is the ratio of the compounds supposed to be mixed by weight or by volume? I think Mike Mims said he uses a digital scale, which means he's using weight for the ratio. I'm a long way from actually buying any of this stuff, so I honestly don't know which way it's supposed to be mixed. But the ratio will be different, depending on whether you're using weight or volume to measure (unless the two parts have the exact same specific gravity). So should I add a digital scale to my list of KR-2 building tools? Toby Dunham Houston, TX homepage at http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Runway/7013 _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: More Superfil Questions From: KR2616TJ@aol.com Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 07:49:57 EDT X-Message-Number: 2 In a message dated 8/7/99 7:31:33 AM Eastern Daylight Time, tobin_patrick@hotmail.com writes: << Is the ratio of the compounds supposed to be mixed by weight or by volume? >> 2:1 by weight or 1.5:1 by volume. Dana Overall 1999 KR Gathering host Richmond, KY mailto:kr2616tj@aol.com http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/hangar/7085/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: postal scales From: "Mark Langford" Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 08:02:20 -0500 X-Message-Number: 3 Tobin Dunham wrote: > Ok, let me get this straight. Is the ratio of the compounds supposed to be > mixed by weight or by volume? Like Dana said, almost everything comes with the ratio defined by volume or weight. I bought a digital postal scale in the very beginning (after a brief stint of trying to mix epoxy by volume) and am thoroughly convinced it the only way to go. Epoxy pumps can't possibly be as accurate, and eyeballing (whether in calibrated cups or not) is a time consuming pain, and not nearly as accurate on small batches. I routinely mix up one ounce batches of T-88 for small epoxying jobs, possible only because I'm measuring to the gram with the postal scale. And it's quick and simple to do. Put the cup on the scale and zero it, and pour in whatever amount of resin you think you'll need. Read the scale. If it says 112 grams, pick up your $3 epoxy encrusted Walmart calculator and key in 112 x 1.27 = 142.2. [1.27:1 is the ratio of hardener to resin for Aeropoxy] Pour in the hardener until the scale reads 142 and you just nailed the mixture within about 1% (due to roundoff, resolution, etc). Try that eyeballing mixtures thru the side of a cup. And it takes about as much time to do as it took to read those sentences. The postal scale also has the advantage or working with ALL epoxies, fillers, etc. Pumps normally have a fixed ratio. You can also use the epoxy scale to pat yourself on the back after you've lightened the crap out of something. I reduced my VDO fuel senders from something like 21 ounces down to 2.3 ounces with a little creative "elective surgery". A few years back the newsletter devoted about 15 pages to building a very complicated epoxy scale from scratch. I was tempted to mail the guy a postal scale, but I didn't want to burst his bubble. And I guess it depends on how much your time is worth to you. Aircraft Spruce sells the Pelouze PE5 electronic scale (PN 12-01580) for $78. I paid $63 for mine 5 years ago. Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: postal scales From: "John Weikel" Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 09:52:50 -0500 X-Message-Number: 4 Mark, I use the scales too and learned another handy tip in the old Alenander Airoplane Composite Class I attended. Weigh the fiberglass cloth you are going to use and then mix the same weight of epoxy. Also, slide the scale into a gallon size ziplock bag (unzipped) to keep epoxy off the scale. Another simple hint was to put the cloth in a microwave for a minute or two to remove any moisture. John W KR-2S RW-6 Kerrville, Tx jandd@maverickbbs.com -----Original Message----- From: Mark Langford To: KR-net users group Date: Saturday, August 07, 1999 8:02 AM Subject: [kr-net] postal scales >Tobin Dunham wrote: > >> Ok, let me get this straight. Is the ratio of the compounds supposed to >be >> mixed by weight or by volume? > >Like Dana said, almost everything comes with the ratio defined by volume or >weight. > >I bought a digital postal scale in the very beginning (after a brief stint >of trying to mix epoxy by volume) and am thoroughly convinced it the only >way to go. Epoxy pumps can't possibly be as accurate, and eyeballing >(whether in calibrated cups or not) is a time consuming pain, and not nearly >as accurate on small batches. I routinely mix up one ounce batches of T-88 >for small epoxying jobs, possible only because I'm measuring to the gram >with the postal scale. And it's quick and simple to do. Put the cup on the >scale and zero it, and pour in whatever amount of resin you think you'll >need. Read the scale. If it says 112 grams, pick up your $3 epoxy >encrusted Walmart calculator and key in 112 x 1.27 = 142.2. [1.27:1 is >the ratio of hardener to resin for Aeropoxy] Pour in the hardener until the >scale reads 142 and you just nailed the mixture within about 1% (due to >roundoff, resolution, etc). Try that eyeballing mixtures thru the side of a >cup. And it takes about as much time to do as it took to read those >sentences. > >The postal scale also has the advantage or working with ALL epoxies, >fillers, etc. Pumps normally have a fixed ratio. You can also use the epoxy >scale to pat yourself on the back after you've lightened the crap out of >something. I reduced my VDO fuel senders from something like 21 ounces down >to 2.3 ounces with a little creative "elective surgery". > >A few years back the newsletter devoted about 15 pages to building a very >complicated epoxy scale from scratch. I was tempted to mail the guy a >postal scale, but I didn't want to burst his bubble. And I guess it depends >on how much your time is worth to you. Aircraft Spruce sells the Pelouze >PE5 electronic scale (PN 12-01580) for $78. I paid $63 for mine 5 years >ago. > >Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama >mailto:langford@hiwaay.net >see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford > > > >--- >You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: jandd@maverickbbs.com >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Question. From: GREG S MARTIN Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 07:54:57 -0700 X-Message-Number: 5 I heard a lot of people talking of a news letter. How do I get in touch with them to order it and hopefully back issues. Happy building and/or flying Greg Martin Bakersfield, CA ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: More Superfil Questions From: Mike Mims Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1999 08:16:33 -0700 X-Message-Number: 6 Tobin Dunham wrote: > > > So should I add a digital scale to my list of KR-2 building tools? > Weather you buy superfil or not you will need a good small postal type scale. Another key to superfil is thorough mixing. I mix mine in an old tupperware bowl and a bent piece of piano wire (shaped like an L ) in a drill (kinda like a paint mixer) I whip it up until it looks like blue cake icing and then put it on. If you guys are finding soft spots in your filler its because you didn't mix it correctly (IE, your lazy). When mixing ANY epoxy based product you MUST mix it thoroughly, other wise you will end up with either soft (Superfil) or hard (epoxy and micro) spots that will be impossible to sand. -- zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Micheal Mims Filling and Sanding again! http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/4136/ http://members.home.com/mikemims/ Mirror Site http://www.fortunecity.com/marina/anchor/270/ Aliso Viejo CA ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Question. From: "John Weikel" Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 10:20:55 -0500 X-Message-Number: 7 Greg, KR Newsletter 624 West University Dr, PMB 199 Denton, Tx 76201 Publisher is Monte Miller (940) 566-5871 $20.00 per year Back issues available John W -----Original Message----- From: GREG S MARTIN To: KR-net users group Date: Saturday, August 07, 1999 9:54 AM Subject: [kr-net] Question. >I heard a lot of people talking of a news letter. How do I get in touch >with them to order it and hopefully back issues. > >Happy building and/or flying > >Greg Martin >Bakersfield, CA > >--- >You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: jandd@maverickbbs.com >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: 2180 Less Reliable? From: MARVIN MCCOY Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1999 20:24:09 -0700 X-Message-Number: 8 I checked out the corvair web page and I have to agree that the corvair engine sounds unbeatable. But being the pessimist and cynic that I am, I can't help wonder why there are not more corvair engines used in aircraft. There is a reason, what it is I do not know, but I don't think the real reason has been explained. And I do not think weight has much to do with it. Corvair got a bad rap some time ago when Nader wrote his book "unsafe at any speed" I don't know if that could have anything to do with the lack of corvair engines in airplanes. I still have a big red flag in my mind. Does anyone know how the dimensions compare to the VW, such as the height and width of the two different motors. I know the length is a little longer. Marvin McCoy Seattle, WA. North end of Boeing field ---------------- Dean Collette wrote: > > > > Personally, I am absolutely convinced that the Corvair is THE way to > go. In fact, I believe it enough that I sold my Lycoming. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: postal scales From: Mike Mims Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1999 08:22:20 -0700 X-Message-Number: 9 Mark Langford wrote: > > > A few years back the newsletter devoted about 15 pages to building a very > complicated epoxy scale from scratch. I was tempted to mail the guy a > postal scale, but I didn't want to burst his bubble. And I guess it depends > on how much your time is worth to you. Aircraft Spruce sells the Pelouze > PE5 electronic scale (PN 12-01580) for $78. I paid $63 for mine 5 years > ago. > Gee Mark some of us have both! :o) Yes I have a pump and a digital scale. I have used them both quiet often since the fiberglass, epoxy, and filler portion of my project started. I used the glue gun with the T-88. Its a great tool for big jobs but kind of a pain in the butt for small batches. This is where the digital scale was nice. -- zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Micheal Mims Filling and Sanding again! http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/4136/ http://members.home.com/mikemims/ Mirror Site http://www.fortunecity.com/marina/anchor/270/ Aliso Viejo CA ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Question. From: Mike Mims Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1999 08:26:14 -0700 X-Message-Number: 10 John Weikel wrote: > > Greg, > KR Newsletter > 624 West University Dr, PMB 199 > Denton, Tx 76201 > Publisher is Monte Miller > (940) 566-5871 > $20.00 per year > Back issues available > Back issues from WAY back can be had for free if you find someone on the KRNet that will make you a copy. I think someone was burning them onto CD Rom for us,.......Uhhhh Oscar? :o) Dude if you need any help burning CDs let me know. I will be glad to burn a few 100 for you. I really need a copy to include on my Web Site CD anyway. -- zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Micheal Mims Filling and Sanding again! http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/4136/ http://members.home.com/mikemims/ Mirror Site http://www.fortunecity.com/marina/anchor/270/ Aliso Viejo CA ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: 2180 Less Reliable? From: Mike Mims Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1999 08:34:13 -0700 X-Message-Number: 11 MARVIN MCCOY wrote: > > I checked out the corvair web page and I have to agree that the corvair > engine sounds unbeatable. But being the pessimist and cynic that I am, > I can't help wonder why there are not more corvair engines used in > aircraft>>>> I have been giving some thought to it but decided I will stick with my Lycoming. I too am pessimistic about the Corvair, mostly because my dad bought two of these cars (brand new) and they were both, in his words "pieces of sh*t"! They never ran right and both started burning oil before their 6 month birthday. Don't get me wrong I would love to see a 120 hp cheap engine come to life for use eXperimentors but I will let someone else do the eXperiment with this one. -- zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Micheal Mims Filling and Sanding again! http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/4136/ http://members.home.com/mikemims/ Mirror Site http://www.fortunecity.com/marina/anchor/270/ Aliso Viejo CA ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: 2180 Less Reliable, or Corvair not popular? From: EveninBrz@aol.com Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 12:02:47 EDT X-Message-Number: 12 In a message dated 8/7/1999 8:25:39 AM Pacific Daylight Time, mr.marvin@worldnet.att.net writes: << There is a reason, what it is I do not know, but I don't think the real reason has been explained. And I do not think weight has much to do with it. Corvair got a bad rap some time ago when Nader wrote his book "unsafe at any speed" I don't know if that could have anything to do with the lack of corvair engines in airplanes. I still have a big red flag in my mind. >> Marvin, There are several reasons why the Corvaior was not as popular as the VW for aircraft. 1. At the time that the VW was being adapted to aircraft, it was cheaper to build a VW than it was a Corvair. 2. No support, no support, and then there is the problem of no support. Like Mark Langford said in a previous post, if you want a Corvair conversion you will have to do it yourself. That eleminates everyone that can't build an engine right there. No one has made a Corversion that you can buy like they do for the VW( I feel that Great Plains is missing a good one there). I personally know of only 2 KR's that were built with Corvairs in them. 3. How do you mount it to the firewall? Unless and untill someone comes up with an accessory case with mounts on it. The corvair must be "bed" mounted, very few people have the skills and the confidence to design and build their own engine mount for it. 4. Weight. It weighs 225 lbs or so, about the same as an O-200. Originally the KR could not handle that heavy of an engine. About 15 years or so ago they started putting O-200's in KR's. The firewall and foreward structure was beefed up at that time. Voila!! The KR2S. If you look back at old issues of the KR newsletter you will see where the firewall failed on a rough landing with a Turbo charged 2180 on it. There are 4 very good reasons why it never became popular as an aircraft engine. If 1/2 of the effort had been put into the Corvair that was put into the VW, then the VW would now be a dead issue. People would be asking you why you would be wanting to work on converting the VW when the Corvair is available? Larry Shull Mail to: EveninBrz@aol.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Question. From: EveninBrz@aol.com Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 12:06:40 EDT X-Message-Number: 13 In a message dated 8/7/1999 8:31:24 AM Pacific Daylight Time, mikemims@home.com writes: << Back issues from WAY back can be had for free if you find someone on the KRNet that will make you a copy. I think someone was burning them onto CD Rom for us,.......Uhhhh Oscar? :o) Dude if you need any help burning CDs let me know. I will be glad to burn a few 100 for you. I really need a copy to include on my Web Site CD anyway. >> Mike, I would be glad to help with that project also. Have 2 CD burners available here. Larry Shull Mail to: EveninBrz@aol.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: 2180 Less Reliable, or Corvair not popular? From: "R.W. Moore" Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 12:32:27 -0400 X-Message-Number: 14 I am 68 years old, and as I remember, the problem with the convair was it was tail heavy and would go out of control under some conditions. I do not think it was with the engine. R. W. Moore N115RM KR1 ----- Original Message ----- From: To: KR-net users group Sent: Saturday, August 07, 1999 12:02 PM Subject: [kr-net] Re: 2180 Less Reliable, or Corvair not popular? > In a message dated 8/7/1999 8:25:39 AM Pacific Daylight Time, > mr.marvin@worldnet.att.net writes: > > << There is a reason, what it is I do not know, but I don't > think the real reason has been explained. And I do not think weight has > much to do with it. Corvair got a bad rap some time ago when Nader > wrote his book "unsafe at any speed" I don't know if that could have > anything to do with the lack of corvair engines in airplanes. I still > have a big red flag in my mind. >> > > Marvin, > There are several reasons why the Corvaior was not as popular as the VW > for aircraft. > 1. At the time that the VW was being adapted to aircraft, it was > cheaper to build a VW than it was a Corvair. > 2. No support, no support, and then there is the problem of no support. > Like Mark Langford said in a previous post, if you want a Corvair conversion > you will have to do it yourself. That eleminates everyone that can't build an > engine right there. No one has made a Corversion that you can buy like they > do for the VW( I feel that Great Plains is missing a good one there). I > personally know of only 2 KR's that were built with Corvairs in them. > 3. How do you mount it to the firewall? Unless and untill someone comes > up with an accessory case with mounts on it. The corvair must be "bed" > mounted, very few people have the skills and the confidence to design and > build their own engine mount for it. > 4. Weight. It weighs 225 lbs or so, about the same as an O-200. > Originally the KR could not handle that heavy of an engine. About 15 years or > so ago they started putting O-200's in KR's. The firewall and foreward > structure was beefed up at that time. Voila!! The KR2S. If you look back at > old issues of the KR newsletter you will see where the firewall failed on a > rough landing with a Turbo charged 2180 on it. > There are 4 very good reasons why it never became popular as an aircraft > engine. If 1/2 of the effort had been put into the Corvair that was put into > the VW, then the VW would now be a dead issue. People would be asking you why > you would be wanting to work on converting the VW when the Corvair is > available? > Larry Shull > Mail to: EveninBrz@aol.com > > --- > 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: oshkosh From: "w.g. kirkland" Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 12:06:32 -0400 X-Message-Number: 15 them ankle biters can be a problem! W.G. KIRKLAND kirkland@vianet.on.ca ---------- > From: Rob v/d Merwe > To: KR-net users group > Subject: [kr-net] Re: oshkosh > Date: Monday, August 02, 1999 5:36 PM > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Langford [SMTP:langford@hiwaay.net] > Sent: 02 August 1999 08:42 > To: KR-net users group > Subject: [kr-net] Re: oshkosh > > >I'll reserve my judgment on > > this airplane until I hear from you guys, but the low turnout says > > something (I just don't know what it says). > > The old timers may want to elaborate on this, but a lot of the "problem" > with Oshkosh is that the KR pilots felt like they were slighted one year, > and as any RV builder will be quick to point out, KRs are generally looked > down upon by "real" aircraft builders. KRs just don't get much respect at > Oshkosh, but they sure get a lot at the Gatherings! I will probably fly > mine to Oshkosh as often as possible, just because I like to go, and it's > the fastest way I have to get there (once it's built). Bottom line with > Oshkosh is that many KR pilots are boycotting, for one reason or another... > > Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama > mailto:langford@hiwaay.net > see KR2S N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford > > Another reason is the serious rash I have experienced from the crowds > prodding and pawing, forget about the yob who lets his todler stand on the > NO STEP with hob nail boots to leave a > greasynoseprinticescreampawprintandscratch in your polished conopy, MIND MY > PLAIN IT IS MINE AND I AM PROUD OF IT . Been to 5 EAA conventions in my > krrrrrrr and I love going, just have to put up with the rash. > Rob infratig@global.co.za > Ps. KR's are real homebuilts, not like RV's > --- > You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: infratig@global.co.za > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > > --- > You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: kirkland@vianet.on.ca > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: postal scales From: "Mark Langford" Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 11:43:32 -0500 X-Message-Number: 16 WG Kirkland correctly pointed out that I screwed up the ratio part of my explanation. I originally had put 1 to .27 and decided that 1:.27 would look better but goofed up the editing on that. It should be 1 to .27 rather than 1 to 1.27, if that makes any sense... Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: HAPI Magnum 75 From: "Eddie KIng" Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 18:00:33 +0100 X-Message-Number: 17 Does anyone have one of these for sale, run out or parted out? I have a cracked rocker cover, which is not standard VW as this engine uses seperate barrels and heads. If anyone has any info on anything HAPI I'd be grateful. Eddie King G-BUDF http://www.a1techno.com/kr2/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: HAPI Magnum 75 From: Mike Mims Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1999 10:59:55 -0700 X-Message-Number: 18 Eddie KIng wrote: > > Does anyone have one of these for sale, run out or parted out? > I have a cracked rocker cover, which is not standard VW as this engine uses > seperate barrels and heads. > If anyone has any info on anything HAPI I'd be grateful. > > Eddie King > G-BUDF > http://www.a1techno.com/kr2/ > Eddie those heads were made by SCAT. Pick up a copy of Hot VWs mag and you will find a SCAT add in it for sure. I am not sure how they will react to you telling them they are the heads from HAPI and will go on an airplane though. -- zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Micheal Mims Filling and Sanding again! http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/4136/ http://members.home.com/mikemims/ Mirror Site http://www.fortunecity.com/marina/anchor/270/ Aliso Viejo CA ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: HAPI Magnum 75 From: Mike Mims Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1999 11:47:03 -0700 X-Message-Number: 19 Eddie KIng wrote: > > Does anyone have one of these for sale, run out or parted out? > I have a cracked rocker cover, which is not standard VW as this engine uses > seperate barrels and heads. Also I wanted to add that you may want to consider tossing those heads and buying yourself a set of regular (new) VW style heads. My hanger buddy has those heads on his 2300 cc and he hates them. It seems the idea of the individual heads that was supposed to allow each cylinder to expand and contract, therefor keep the compression equal at all times was a bad one. That is, it doesn't really work that well and they seem to have 1000 places that allow oil to seep. (Don't you think the German engineers would have thought of it if it was a good idea) Not only that there is so little fin area on those heads that they are a pain in the butt to keep cool if your making any real HP. I have heard the same complaints from more than one builder/flyer who has these heads. Also they are very expensive compared to stock (new) VW heads. You may spend more on one head than a set of new ones will cost. Not only that they DO NOT make any more power than a stock VW head in the application we are talking about. They were designed for high revving auto engines. -- zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Micheal Mims Filling and Sanding again! http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/4136/ http://members.home.com/mikemims/ Mirror Site http://www.fortunecity.com/marina/anchor/270/ Aliso Viejo CA ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: HAPI Magnum 75 From: cartera Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1999 15:22:42 -0600 X-Message-Number: 20 Mike Mims wrote: > > Eddie KIng wrote: > > > > Does anyone have one of these for sale, run out or parted out? > > I have a cracked rocker cover, which is not standard VW as this engine uses > > seperate barrels and heads. > > If anyone has any info on anything HAPI I'd be grateful. > > > > Eddie King > > G-BUDF > > http://www.a1techno.com/kr2/ > > > > Eddie those heads were made by SCAT. Pick up a copy of Hot VWs mag and > you will find a SCAT add in it for sure. I am not sure how they will > react to you telling them they are the heads from HAPI and will go on an > airplane though. > > -- > zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz > Micheal Mims > Filling and Sanding again! > http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/4136/ > http://members.home.com/mikemims/ > Mirror Site http://www.fortunecity.com/marina/anchor/270/ > Aliso Viejo CA > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > --- > You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: cartera@cuug.ab.ca > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com Hi Gang, Did you not know that you were building a dune buggy. I did know that you had to volunteer information like this for parts. -- Adrian VE6AFY Mailto:cartera@cuug.ab.ca http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~cartera ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: 2180 Less Reliable? From: WGLIDE78@aol.com Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 17:44:28 EDT X-Message-Number: 21 Marvin --if it was you that said Boeing surplus wasn't selling their lexan etc--well I guess they changed their mind cuz I just got back from there and all kinds of it was selling for $34.00 a 4x8 sheet. They have different thickness's clear tinted orange yellow green blue you name it. I'm going back monday and get some for shading some windows in the house. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: postal scales From: ejanssen@chipsnet.com (Ed Janssen) Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 17:42:45 -0500 X-Message-Number: 22 Mark, Wouldn't a 1 to .27 ratio be otherwise stated as a 3.7 :1 ratio? That would be way off. Your original 1 to 1.27 ratio looks much closer. Ed Janssen -----Original Message----- From: Mark Langford To: KR-net users group Date: Saturday, August 07, 1999 11:52 AM Subject: [kr-net] Re: postal scales >WG Kirkland correctly pointed out that I screwed up the ratio part of my >explanation. I originally had put 1 to .27 and decided that 1:.27 would >look better but goofed up the editing on that. It should be 1 to .27 rather >than 1 to 1.27, if that makes any sense... > >Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama >mailto:langford@hiwaay.net >see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford > > >--- >You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: ejanssen@chipsnet.com >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: 2180 Less Reliable, or Corvair not popular? From: Theron A Proper Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 16:08:45 -0700 X-Message-Number: 23 To all: I've been watching all the engine talk for a couple of months. The one I haven't seen mentioned of is the Franklin. The 4 cylinder 235 cu.in. weights about 200 or so pounds and costs new about 5500 dollars I am told. These are new current production, not used or remans. They have a web site, don't have the address handy if any one wants it I will look it up and post it . Personal opinion, If the KR series was a tad larger I would think the Corvair would be a good choice. I also feel the same about the 4 cylinder Continentals and Lycomings. One of the things that helped form this opinion is I once owned a AA1 Yankee and while I liked it I felt it was just about as small as practical for the 4 cylinder typical aircraft engine. On the subject of the EAA/Oshkosh, Love/Hate. I belong to the EAA get the Experimenter which I think is closer to the grass roots. Haven't been to Oshkosh for probably 18 years. Too Big, too expensive, too much hassle even back then you had to get there in the middle of the week before it starts to get a decent camping spot. Even in the camp ground I felt like the bastard step child,most people had more invested in their motor homes than I had in airplanes. My KR-2 will be fairly stock. A friend and I started building Kr's in 1975 Mine is in the boat stage hanging in his garage. Numerous things intervened, including severe disillusionment with homebuilding and aviation in general. Thought I'd swore off flying for good,until I moved to Arizona. Sold my last plane in 1994. The bug bit again, big time!! Hope to truck my neglected KR-2 out here over Thanksgiving. Bought a VW 1600 that I will most likely build into 1915 for it. prope@juno.com ___________________________________________________________________ Get the Internet just the way you want it. Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month! Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: postal scales From: "Mark Langford" Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 18:48:11 -0500 X-Message-Number: 24 > Wouldn't a 1 to .27 ratio be otherwise stated as a 3.7 :1 ratio? That would > be way off. Your original 1 to 1.27 ratio looks much closer. Ed, Aeropoxy is that way. Lots of resin, only a little hardener required. Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: 2180 Less Reliable? From: "Mark Langford" Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 18:48:28 -0500 X-Message-Number: 25 Marvin McCoy wrote: > Does anyone know how the dimensions compare to the VW, such as the > height and width of the two different motors. In his book Wynne writes that the Corvair is smaller in every dimension than the 0-200, so if an 0-200 will fit in your plane, so will a Corvair. My engine's apart or I'd measure it for you, but IN THE CAR it's 36" wide, 16" tall (with blower sticking up) and 29" long (with bellhousing, which goes). After removing the sheet metal from the sides it's only 28" wide. Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama mailto:langford@hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Corvair size From: Erik Meisterman Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1999 18:41:55 +0000 X-Message-Number: 26 At 06:48 PM 8/7/99 -0500, Mark wrote: > >In his book Wynne writes that the Corvair is smaller in every dimension than >the 0-200, so if an 0-200 will fit in your plane, so will a Corvair. My >engine's apart or I'd measure it for you, but IN THE CAR it's 36" wide, 16" >tall (with blower sticking up) and 29" long (with bellhousing, which goes). >After removing the sheet metal from the sides it's only 28" wide. > >Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama Mark, I'm not sure the converted Corvair is shorter than the 0-200. My Polliwagen cowl for the 0-200 is 30" long which accomodates the engine mount and motor. A review of a Bud Rinker drawing shows the Corvair with a very short redrive as being 30.3" long from rear alternator to prop hub. The Rinker redrive is very short, only slightly longer than a direct drive hub. Sooo, I might have to bolt the Corvair directly to the firewall to fit in the space occupied formerly by a 0-200 with mount. The cowling for the Lyc.320 is longer and will probably accomodate a converted Corvair with proper mounts. I think the Corvair is longer than the 0-200 which should not pose problems for those making their own cowls; but is a consideration for kitplanes with prefab cowlings. Erik Meisterman mailto:emeister@bluecrow.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: lexan From: "w.g. kirkland" Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 22:26:46 -0400 X-Message-Number: 27 great stuff and an even better price. Don't try hitting it with a hammer unless you keep ur head out of the way. The hammer will just rebound. You may have a problem trying to break it in an emergency. The Coast Guard used to have a problem with hunters shooting at their radar beacons just because they were in isolated spots and it seemed like a good thing to do. To protect them we put up lexan shields at an angle of 30 deg. to the vertical. Worked real good. Would deflect a 30-06. Should make an excellent windshield but think twice about the canopy idea. W.G. KIRKLAND kirkland@vianet.on.ca ---------- > From: WGLIDE78@aol.com > To: KR-net users group > Subject: [kr-net] Re: 2180 Less Reliable? > Date: Saturday, August 07, 1999 5:44 PM > > Marvin --if it was you that said Boeing surplus wasn't selling their lexan > etc--well I guess they changed their mind cuz I just got back from there and > all kinds of it was selling for $34.00 a 4x8 sheet. They have different > thickness's clear tinted orange yellow green blue you name it. I'm going back > monday and get some for shading some windows in the house. > > --- > You are currently subscribed to kr-net as: kirkland@vianet.on.ca > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-kr-net-17800J@telelists.com > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: 2180 Less Reliable? From: EveninBrz@aol.com Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 23:18:30 EDT X-Message-Number: 28 In a message dated 8/7/1999 4:46:57 PM Pacific Daylight Time, langford@hiwaay.net writes: << Marvin McCoy wrote: > Does anyone know how the dimensions compare to the VW, such as the > height and width of the two different motors. In his book Wynne writes that the Corvair is smaller in every dimension than the 0-200, so if an 0-200 will fit in your plane, so will a Corvair. My engine's apart or I'd measure it for you, but IN THE CAR it's 36" wide, 16" tall (with blower sticking up) and 29" long (with bellhousing, which goes). After removing the sheet metal from the sides it's only 28" wide. >> Marvin, Without all of the junk on it, here are the basic dimensions. Height= 12 1/2" Widyh=27 1/2" Length= 20" This is a stripped engine. Larry Shull Mail to: EveninBrz@aol.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: oshkosh-i was there From: "Jesse Klebsch" Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1999 20:53:38 PDT X-Message-Number: 29 i made it up to oshkosh this year for the fist time ever. i promised myself that i would fly my kr-2 there as soon as i bought it last year. it took some work though after finding a burnt vavle and cracked heads the day before oshkosh started during the condition inspection. after finding and installing two new heads, i finally made it to oshkosh on sunday. the good part was i missed the heat, the bad was i missed the only other kr up there. i was quite suprised that i was the only one there, but i had no idea what to expect. i was also a little overwhelmed by the number of people who came up to the airplane and wanted to talk about it. i did not build the aircraft, but have rebuilt the engine and changed or replaced most things breakable on it. people were definatley interested in the design. i agree with most of you that oshkosh is very commercial, but i definately felt it was well worth the trip and the night on the park bench (miscommunication on obtaining a tent). the airshow was in credible and if my kr was fully aerobatic, i would be in heaven. i'm looking forward seeing more kr-2's and comparing them as i have only seen one other in person. i'll try everything to make it to the gathering. jesse klebsch ottumwa, iowa 515 682 6841 _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: 2180 Less Reliable, or Corvair not popular? From: jscott.pilot@juno.com Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 22:48:25 -0700 X-Message-Number: 30 On Sat, 7 Aug 1999 16:08:45 -0700 Theron A Proper writes: >To all: >I've been watching all the engine talk for a couple of months. The >one I haven't seen mentioned of is the Franklin. >The 4 cylinder 235 cu.in. weights about 200 or so pounds and costs new >about 5500 dollars I am told. These >are new current production, not used or remans. They have a web site, >don't have the address handy if any one wants it >I will look it up and post it . An excellent point. I have been considering a Franklin as a possible replacement for my C-85 if I can ever wear it out. It will fit the same mount at the Continental, the same weight as an O-200, fits in the same cowl space, can use many of the same accessories with a change in the drive gears of the accessories, and puts out more HP than an O-200 (115 hp). I do question the price. I'd be very surprised if one could really get one for $5500. If so, that's got to be with no mags, starter, generator, or drive gears for those accessories. That can add up to another $2000 - $3000 for those components new. Bottom line here is that I think I can probably buy a ready to fly O-200 for less when the time comes, but will certainly take a look at the Franklin at the time. Jeff Scott - Los Alamos, NM mailto:jscott.pilot@juno.com See N1213w construction and first flight at http://www.thuntek.net/~jeb/krjeff.htm ___________________________________________________________________ Get the Internet just the way you want it. Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month! Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: KRNet Awards From: "Dean Collette" Date: Sun, 8 Aug 1999 01:06:30 -0500 X-Message-Number: 31 DO NOT HIT "REPLY" TO THIS MESSAGE Please respond directly to mailto:drdean@execpc.com Use this post as a guide or form to vote for each of the following categories. For categories 1 & 2 include as much information as you can. Since these awards have never been given out before, there is no date limits on the posts that qualify for these awards. 1. Best Overall Post 2. Best Single Technical Post 3. Best Overall Contributor 4. Best Technical Contributor 5. Best Overall Web Site 6. Special Award Nominations Send any questions, problems, or complaints to me - I'll do what I can. Dean Collette Trailing Edge Technologies, LLC Mailto:drdean@execpc.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: KRNet & The Gathering From: "Dean Collette" Date: Sun, 8 Aug 1999 00:42:51 -0500 X-Message-Number: 32 KRNetheads; In years past at the annual KR fly-in, KRNet has never really been acknowledged. In fact, some people would prefer that KRNet not even be mentioned at the gathering. I, for one, don't agree with that attitude, and I'd like to change that. Personally, I think that KRNet is one of the most valuable assets that a builder of a KR can have. I would even say that KRNet is responsible for a portion of the recent popularity of the airplane. In the past I have been a part of 10 - 15 different lists at one time or another, and in general, I must say that KRNet is BY FAR, the best. So, at this year's gathering, I think KRNet needs to be recognized. Understand, that before this post was made to the list in general, I have been given permission by both the KRNet administrator and the host of this years fly-in. I don't want to step on any toes here. Trailing Edge Technologies would like to pay for a series of awards to be given out at the fly-in this year. The purpose of these awards is to recognize a couple of our members. There are a few members who go above and beyond the "call of duty." They gladly spend their free time helping, advising, and generally passing along valuable information. In addition, several people have spent a considerable amount of time building web sites. These sites give us the ability to look at somebody else's project and glean information, review ideas, and plan our own projects. These awards are also to encourage more of the 'best" that we have to offer. You noticed that you just received 2 posts from me. The second post is a list of the awards in a form that will make my life a little easier. The proposed awards are: 1. Best Overall Post 2. Best Single Technical Post 3. Best Overall Contributor 4. Best Technical Contributor 5. Best Overall Web Site 6. Special Award Nominations Each member of KRNet is encouraged to vote for each of the above awards. No, you don't have to vote for all of the above categories, but it would be helpful if you did. The special award category is for you to tell me if there is someone out there, not covered by the above categories, that needs to be recognized. Please use the second post as a "form" or guide and respond directly to me and NOT TO KRNet. I will tally the votes. Winners will be announced at the gathering and on KRNet. You can go to the KRNet web site at http://www.krnet.org and use the archives to review past posts if you like. Many people, including myself, tend to keep useful posts, so reviewing is a snap. When you vote, please, only vote once. If you are referring to a specific post, please include any information about the post that you can - date, subject, person posting - as much information as you can to help me track down the post. No one is excluded - so you need not be at the gathering to win. Dean Collette mailto:drdean@execpc.com Trailing Edge Technologies, LLC --- 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