Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

engines
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV10-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

rvbuilder(at)sausen.net
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 8:16 am Post subject: engines

Speaking of the Subie and Dan, how goes it with that engine?  You

keeping a log anywhere on the experience with it.  I for one am very

anxious to find out how it works out, even if Jan and co think I'm

against it for asking straight questions.  I at least trust Dan to give

us the straight talk on it. Anyone else out there making any progress

with the Subie or other conversions?



  On another note, Eci will hopefully have their clone ready sometime

next year (was supposed to be this year).  I haven't checked with them

in quite a while but they expected the cost to be "considerably" less

than a new or "X" Lyc 540.  We shall see.



Michael 



--

sschmidt(at)ussynthetic.c
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 9:15 am Post subject: engines

Great post Tim.  I agree with everything you say.  The most expensive RV I have heard of so far (and it's not me) was $210,000.  The way you get that high is you start letting others do your painting, wiring, upholstery, ect...



If I had to guess I would say the average cost for an RV right now is $150,000 with the high at $210,000 and the low at $95,000.  But you should be able to build a nice RV-10 with new engine and prop for $120,000 if you don't go over board with avionics.  I know I planned for $120,000 and missed that by a little.



Scott Schmidt



--

GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 9:33 am Post subject: engines

Our EAA group will be touring the Lycoming factory next week and I can  bring up the subject of experimentals for RV 10's if you like...but I'm sure  they are not really targeting the RV market rather assuming that we will all  just jump on the bandwagon.

  

 Patrick Scott

 EAA 240 Prez

  [quote][b]

millstees(at)ameritech.ne
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 9:37 am Post subject: engines

Michael,



I am building an RV-10 with the H-6 Subaru, and will be receiving my engine

in the same batch as Dan Lloyd.



Steve Mills

RV-10 40486 Slow-build

Naperville, Illinois

finishing fuselage

--

GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 9:41 am Post subject: engines

In a message dated 10/17/2006 11:08:00 AM Eastern Daylight Time,  BPA(at)bpaengines.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  Add to    this the cost of having organized labor, and you quickly add 30% to your    overhead. 	


 

 Allan,

  

 I guess that the point that many of the kit builders don't understand is  the benefits and union rates the workers receive!!!  Please before I  get the anti union comments...I'm pro union and if the union can provide great  employees and be competitive I'm in their corner.  Either way, Lycoming  makes a good reliable engine and it seems to be the engine of choice for many  Van's builders.

  

 Patrick

  [quote][b]

BPA(at)bpaengines.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 10:46 am Post subject: engines

No shooting balls of fire at anyone regarding unions, just stating the fact that it does increase operating costs by a significant amount. Agreed, unions have their place. I don’t believe that Superior or ECI have organized labor (I could be wrong) which might account for part of the difference in price of an engine.  I think there are other factors that drive the price up which are probably not appropriate topics for this list, but I don’t think it is greed on anyone’s part.  We believe in Lycoming products, otherwise we wouldn’t sell them.  

   

Allen  

Do Not Archive  

   

--

Vern(at)teclabsinc.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 10:57 am Post subject: engines

John,



I worried about 100LL for a while until I realized it isn't like when 80

octane went away. Think of all those new (read expensive) Cirrus,

Cessnas, Mooneys, Pipers, Columibias out there and they all burn 100LL.

This represents a sizable investment in the fleet not to mention the

companies behind them. If the lead producers go away there will be an

alternative other than mogas, expensive yes but still there.



But let's say I'm dead wrong. The beauty of experimentals are the

latitude we have. So if 100LL goes away next year, build new fuel tanks

that are compatible with ? fuel. Convert that IO-540 to an O-540 and run

mogas, E85 ect. Pull the Lycoming and put the new vegetable oil burning

turbine on.



One leading indicator about fuel is going to be the certified aircraft

manufactures. If they start seriously moving away from 100LL to say JetA

then the games a foot. Until then enjoy building, then enjoy flying, and

just plan your TBO around the demise of 100LL:) 



Vern (324 fuselage) 

Do not archive



--

jdalton77(at)comcast.net
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:09 am Post subject: engines

You are right - as long as people continue to buy  and there is no competition, Lycoming and Continental can charge us full price  as if they had the same liability as a certified aircraft, but without the  responsibility.

  

 You can bet they are getting a deal on their  insurance on their so-called experimental engines.  Too bad they won't be  passing any of that on to us.

  

 Boy I wish Innodyn was real . . . .

  

 Jeff

 [quote]   ---

apilot2(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:16 am Post subject: engines

I somehow thought that a number of builders were going with AeroSport

or BPA or similar sourced overhauled Lyc. engine, with savings in the

5-10K range over a new Lyc from Vans. Or overhauling their own engine.

 Am I wrong or is there good reason to go with the factory new engine?

I see any engine with crank made after 1996 as a minus, as most have

AD, or have been replaced with new version, about little is known

other than Lyc somehow changed specs, because the 1996 specs caused

the original problem(or their forger, who knows). All we really know

is that the older cranks are very proven.



On 10/17/06, GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com <GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  

 In a message dated 10/17/2006 11:08:00 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

 BPA(at)bpaengines.com writes:

 Add to this the cost of having organized labor, and you quickly add 30% to

 your overhead.



 Allan,



 I guess that the point that many of the kit builders don't understand is the

 benefits and union rates the workers receive!!!  Please before I get the

 anti union comments...I'm pro union and if the union can provide great

 employees and be competitive I'm in their corner.  Either way, Lycoming

 makes a good reliable engine and it seems to be the engine of choice for

 many Van's builders.



 Patrick

rvbuilder(at)sausen.net
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:35 am Post subject: engines

Just for some data points can you share the following info:



1) What is the current engine config.

2) What is the current expected HP.

3) When did you order, when were you supposed to receive it, when are

you know told you will receive it. 

4) Are you anticipating any major challenges with the install.

5) When are they expecting to have the James Cowl ready.



  I haven't been keeping track since I went with my Barrett engine so I

don't know the status and there was nothing on display at Airventure.

Items 1, 2, & 3, above were directly related to my decision to go with a

Lyc and I'm curious on if they are still shifting.  I also think they

are important things for prospects to know until there are a few out

there for hard data.



  I used to live and work in the Chicagoland area and would love to drop

in some time after you get the engine and see how it goes.



Thanks,

Michael



--

deruiteraircraftservices(
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:36 am Post subject: engines

The real issue here is whether or not you really  need a brand new engine. if you fly say 100 hours per annum it takes you 20  years to reach the 2000 hours TBO. Already there engines that are specified as  2000hours or 12 years what ever comes first.

  

 There ought to be 540's about that suffer from the  crank issue and have been set aside or otherwise. Try these engines and buy the  crankkit from Lycoming for qualified engines for $2000, it comes with all  hardware and gaskets. This will give you in effect a 0 hour bottom end, then  purchase a set of overhauled studs if the valves are good and built them onto  your overhauled studs and you'll have an engine as good as new for a lot less  and a bit of elbow grease. 

 The scenario above can be achieved for core value  or even lower maybe plus $5000.

  

 Marcel

   [quote][b]

LloydDR(at)wernerco.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:39 am Post subject: engines

Long post, so if you do not like to read hit delete!!



First point I would like to stress to Tim, is that I have never claimed

to be the "average guy", below average or above average, but never

average "grin"

I am steadily making progress. I have the interior from Abby and it sure

looks outstanding. Anyone on the fence with Flightline, I can not say

enough about her and her work. I had the front and rear seats done in

about 10 minutes, and placed the panels for trial fit in 5 minutes or

so. It actually looked like a completed airplane, then I had to take it

all back out and get a reality check! 

I have finalized the panel with Steinair, and their electrician Doug, I

can not say enough of these guys, they have been great to work with, and

the guidance they have offered has been invaluable. Doug has talked

directly with Eggenfellner, and is doing the panel for myself and

another RV9 builder, so he is getting some great experience in designing

the Panel/Electrical systems for the Egg package.

I have installed my fuel system, up to the firewall, just waiting for

the engine for final placement of the Andair firewall pass through

filter. I took apart the dual fuel pumps and inlet filters that

Eggenfellner distributes to us, and I mounted the redundant fuel pumps,

in the stock positions for the Lyco install. I already had the tanks

plumbed for the return line, so it is also sitting at the firewall

waiting for final placement.

The cool thing behind the heater package from Jan is that the inlet

lines match up with the holes for the scat heat tubes for the standard

install, so I just had to make a mount for the heater, and cover plates

to surround the copper tubing for firewall pass through. I have the

three position heater switch ready to be mounted on the panel. In

addition, I used the standard Vans heating duct for distribution. 

So to date, the only significant mods I have made to accommodate the

Firewall Forward Package from Eggenfellner are a duplex fuel valve, a

return line, and a mounting bracket for the heater pass through.

I have been in communication with Jan and we are still on track for a

Dec '06 delivery date. I am visiting the factory over Thanksgiving and

will get to see my engine, I hope to also see the prop then. I have

ordered the 4 blade that was made custom for them. I have talked with

the prop controller manufacturer and everything is steadily making

progress there as well. I have also ordered the James cowl option to go

with the engine, so it should be a relatively simple install, as they

have prefabricated the inlets to match. I will still need to do the

cowling attach and finish, but from what I have heard regarding the

James cowl and other RV products they have been allot better than Vans

standard, but time will tell.

 	  Quote: 	
		  From what I know of the other Eggenfellner FWF RV packages, the install

time is shorter because so much of the prep work is done. This is not to
	


say it is all done, as there is work still to be completed by the

builder. But it is no where near the 2000 hours the other post stated.

It is not plug and play, but pretty close in my opinion. I fully expect

it to be equal time or slightly less than installing a standard lycoming

FWF. I do expect to take more time after first flight to tweak cooling

and cowl exits, but the Lyco guys are also playing with that.

 	  Quote: 	
		  From reports of other builders of other RV models, I expect to have the

engine mounted and running, less than a week after I get it. Allot of
	


things need to come together to make that happen, but I expect it will.

The nice thing about the Eggenfellner package is that I can run it

without the prop, so I can sit in the airplane and not have to make the

noise on my own...



Once I take delivery of the engine and have it up and running, or

anytime for that matter, I would welcome anyone to stop by for a project

visit. I am out of 4G1 in NWPA. I can provide transportation, and have a

guest room and food for those that would need an overnight.

Lust let me know

Dan



40269

RV10E (N289DT)

Do not archive

   

 

--

rvbuilder(at)sausen.net
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:40 am Post subject: engines

If they aren't  targeting the RV market with the 540-X, they really have their heads up their  rear-ends!  Considering the RV-10 is probably the single biggest market for  the Lyc 540-X with over 600 kit's out there in 3 years, they should be kissing  our butts making sure someone doesn't come out with an alternative.  But  alas, they would rather stick all of us with the cost of their manufacturing  defects of the past and drive us to find other solutions.

  

 Michael  Sausen

 -10 #352  Fuselage

 do not  archive



   From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com  [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of  GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com

Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 12:30  PM

To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Re: Re:  engines

 

 Our EAA group will be touring the Lycoming factory next week and I can  bring up the subject of experimentals for RV 10's if you like...but I'm sure  they are not really targeting the RV market rather assuming that we will all  just jump on the bandwagon.

  

 Patrick Scott

 EAA 240 Prez

[quote]



href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List



[b]

Deems Davis

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 925

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:48 am Post subject: engines

Kelly, there are options w/ AeroSport or BPA/Mattituck or the other 

'authorized Lyc builders' I believe that Tim's engine was and Overhauled 

engine from Aerosport. By overhauled I think the only parts not new were 

the case and the crank. Another option (the one I'm using w/ BPA) is the 

Lyc 'experimental kit', where Lyc shipped all New parts to the builder 

(my understanding is that these are the same parts as the certified 

engine) and the builder assembles the engine and puts their name plate 

(experimental) on it. Going this route still provides savings over the 

Factory New Lycoming price. Additionally, with one of the kit builders,  

you are able to have your engine 'blueprinted' and somewhat customized 

(as John Cox would say 'hot rodded') like Allen outlined in his earlier 

post.



Deems Davis # 406

/Finishing

http://deemsrv10.com/



Kelly McMullen wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   



 I somehow thought that a number of builders were going with AeroSport

 or BPA or similar sourced overhauled Lyc. engine, with savings in the

 5-10K range over a new Lyc from Vans. Or overhauling their own engine.

 Am I wrong or is there good reason to go with the factory new engine?

 I see any engine with crank made after 1996 as a minus, as most have

 AD, or have been replaced with new version, about little is known

 other than Lyc somehow changed specs, because the 1996 specs caused

 the original problem(or their forger, who knows). All we really know

 is that the older cranks are very proven.



 On 10/17/06, GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com <GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com> wrote:



>

> In a message dated 10/17/2006 11:08:00 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

> BPA(at)bpaengines.com writes:

> Add to this the cost of having organized labor, and you quickly add 

> 30% to

> your overhead.

>

> Allan,

>

> I guess that the point that many of the kit builders don't understand 

> is the

> benefits and union rates the workers receive!!!  Please before I get the

> anti union comments...I'm pro union and if the union can provide great

> employees and be competitive I'm in their corner.  Either way, Lycoming

> makes a good reliable engine and it seems to be the engine of choice for

> many Van's builders.

>

> Patrick

rvbuilder(at)sausen.net
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 12:24 pm Post subject: engines

While I have no hard facts around this, I have also heard that some

MIDO's will not allow a previously certified engine, that has had time

in an experimental, to be placed into certified service again.  Makes no

sense to me but it is the FAA after all. This would make the idea of

paying extra for a certified engine a bit of a waste.  Then again you

could probably switch regions and get a completely different

interpretation anyway.    I however did go with a brand new

Experimental Lyc "kit" engine.  Cores are getting a little scarce and I

didn't feel like running into a bunch of AD's down the road, not that a

"new" engine won't have that happen.



Michael Sausen

-10 #352 Fuselage



--

indigoonlatigo(at)msn.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 12:32 pm Post subject: engines

Daniel,



Thanks for your long, informative post.



I am very much interested in every available engine option out there and 

Eggenfellner has my $250 refundable deposits.  Notice I say (deposits) 

Please let us other breed know how it is going.  My delivery isn't scheduled 

until Dec '07 due to summertime soaring commitments. Without an engine, it 

takes longer to get where your going.



I would like to see a pic of your dual battery tray if you could send one or 

direct me to one.



JOhn G. 409



DO Not Archive

[quote]From: "Lloyd, Daniel R." <LloydDR(at)wernerco.com>

Reply-To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com

To: <rv10-list(at)matronics.com>

Subject: RE: Re: engines

Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 15:39:30 -0400






Long post, so if you do not like to read hit delete!!



First point I would like to stress to Tim, is that I have never claimed

to be the "average guy", below average or above average, but never

average "grin"

I am steadily making progress. I have the interior from Abby and it sure

looks outstanding. Anyone on the fence with Flightline, I can not say

enough about her and her work. I had the front and rear seats done in

about 10 minutes, and placed the panels for trial fit in 5 minutes or

so. It actually looked like a completed airplane, then I had to take it

all back out and get a reality check!

I have finalized the panel with Steinair, and their electrician Doug, I

can not say enough of these guys, they have been great to work with, and

the guidance they have offered has been invaluable. Doug has talked

directly with Eggenfellner, and is doing the panel for myself and

another RV9 builder, so he is getting some great experience in designing

the Panel/Electrical systems for the Egg package.

I have installed my fuel system, up to the firewall, just waiting for

the engine for final placement of the Andair firewall pass through

filter. I took apart the dual fuel pumps and inlet filters that

Eggenfellner distributes to us, and I mounted the redundant fuel pumps,

in the stock positions for the Lyco install. I already had the tanks

plumbed for the return line, so it is also sitting at the firewall

waiting for final placement.

The cool thing behind the heater package from Jan is that the inlet

lines match up with the holes for the scat heat tubes for the standard

install, so I just had to make a mount for the heater, and cover plates

to surround the copper tubing for firewall pass through. I have the

three position heater switch ready to be mounted on the panel. In

addition, I used the standard Vans heating duct for distribution.

So to date, the only significant mods I have made to accommodate the

Firewall Forward Package from Eggenfellner are a duplex fuel valve, a

return line, and a mounting bracket for the heater pass through.

I have been in communication with Jan and we are still on track for a

Dec '06 delivery date. I am visiting the factory over Thanksgiving and

will get to see my engine, I hope to also see the prop then. I have

ordered the 4 blade that was made custom for them. I have talked with

the prop controller manufacturer and everything is steadily making

progress there as well. I have also ordered the James cowl option to go

with the engine, so it should be a relatively simple install, as they

have prefabricated the inlets to match. I will still need to do the

cowling attach and finish, but from what I have heard regarding the

James cowl and other RV products they have been allot better than Vans

standard, but time will tell.

 >From what I know of the other Eggenfellner FWF RV packages, the install

time is shorter because so much of the prep work is done. This is not to

say it is all done, as there is work still to be completed by the

builder. But it is no where near the 2000 hours the other post stated.

It is not plug and play, but pretty close in my opinion. I fully expect

it to be equal time or slightly less than installing a standard lycoming

FWF. I do expect to take more time after first flight to tweak cooling

and cowl exits, but the Lyco guys are also playing with that.

 >From reports of other builders of other RV models, I expect to have the

engine mounted and running, less than a week after I get it. Allot of

things need to come together to make that happen, but I expect it will.

The nice thing about the Eggenfellner package is that I can run it

without the prop, so I can sit in the airplane and not have to make the

noise on my own...



Once I take delivery of the engine and have it up and running, or

anytime for that matter, I would welcome anyone to stop by for a project

visit. I am out of 4G1 in NWPA. I can provide transportation, and have a

guest room and food for those that would need an overnight.

Lust let me know

Dan



40269

RV10E (N289DT)

Do not archive

--

BPA(at)bpaengines.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 1:19 pm Post subject: engines

Cores are REALLY scarce, and demand premium price to purchase. The cores

that are available were bottom of the barrel engine cores as little as 5

years ago. Every part that rejects on an engine core adds to the cost of

an overhaul somewhere, be it your engine or the engine the parts came

from to build yours, or new. This IMHO is the reason for the IO-540 kit

engine. Lycoming quickly acknowledged the drying up of the 0/IO-540

engine core market and delivered the kit option first. No doubt ECI and

Superior are not too far behind. Sure, this is good news for the end

user as it spurs competition as do the alternate engine(s). This is a

GREAT situation for GA to be in if looking at it from a purely economic

standpoint.



Allen    



--

apilot2(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 1:26 pm Post subject: engines

Where the engine has been used in the past has no relevance to the

FAA. If it has a valid data plate, and all airworthy parts, it is a

certified engine. Especially if you have logbooks to show it has had a

100 hour inspection recently, or freshly overhauled. If you have the

piece with the data plate...usually sump on Lycs, any A&P can build

the rest of the engine out of new PMA parts or Lyc parts, and sign it

off as a freshly overhauled certified engine.

KM

A&P/IA



On 10/17/06, RV Builder (Michael Sausen) <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   



 While I have no hard facts around this, I have also heard that some

 MIDO's will not allow a previously certified engine, that has had time

 in an experimental, to be placed into certified service again.  Makes no

 sense to me but it is the FAA after all. This would make the idea of

 paying extra for a certified engine a bit of a waste.  Then again you

 could probably switch regions and get a completely different

 interpretation anyway.    I however did go with a brand new

 Experimental Lyc "kit" engine.  Cores are getting a little scarce and I

 didn't feel like running into a bunch of AD's down the road, not that a

 "new" engine won't have that happen.



 Michael Sausen

 -10 #352 Fuselage

BPA(at)bpaengines.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 1:39 pm Post subject: engines

Agreed Kelly. The key thing to do is record ALL AND ANY maintenance done

to the engine, in the appropriate fashion, in the log book. And it will

have to be done to conformed status. In other words, CYA and there

should be no issue. But, the maintenance will have to be done by a

person with a powerplant rating in order to return the engine to

certified category. This goes against one of the reasons in building an

airplane anyway which is the freedom to perform your own maintenance,

right?



Allen



--

rvbuilder(at)sausen.net
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 2:54 pm Post subject: engines

Preachin to the choir here.  Like I said, I had heard it somewhere and

given the western region FISDO's dumb a$$ interpretation of airspace

lately anything is possible.



Michael

Do not archive 



--

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV10-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
Page 3 of 5

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum