|
Re: CS prop on Q2?
Martin Skiby
This is a good question. I will shoot him an e-mail and see. I just assumed that he would make them for all sizes.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
--- In Q-LIST@..., "Jim P" <logistics_engineering@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Motors for Q1's
Martin Burns
There is new 4 stroke 35 HP engine from Czechoslovakia which looks very
good for the Q1. It is very light at only about 60 lb, but fairly expensive at about 3000 Euros. See: http://www.vernermotor.com/index.asp?sec=41 Martin Burns G-BKSE Q1 Scotland ________________________________ From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...] On Behalf Of fg13fg Sent: 11 June 2011 20:30 To: Q-LIST@... Subject: [Q-LIST] Subaru motors for Q1's For all you Q1 guys out there, here is another motor option I ran across with potential, when one likes to keep similar to the Onan setup. Very nice motors! http://robinamerica.com/pfeatures.aspx?pid=225 Jason ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------- This email has been scanned by the MxScan Email Security System. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------
|
|
|
|
Re: New Video!!
OK Dan!Mr. Magoo has dood it again! I uploaded my "Angel Fire Flight" to Quick Heads web site. It was easy 'cause I followed the instructions! Duh! Am soo proud o' mah sef'!Bruce Crain
____________________________________________________________ Groupon™ Official Site 1 ridiculously huge coupon a day. Get 50-90% off your city's best! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4df41193b9d6636fdfast06vuc
|
|
|
|
Subaru motors for Q1's
fg13fg <fg13fg@...>
For all you Q1 guys out there, here is another motor option I ran across with potential, when one likes to keep similar to the Onan setup.
Very nice motors! http://robinamerica.com/pfeatures.aspx?pid=225 Jason
|
|
|
|
Re: CS prop on Q2?
Martin,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
I didn't think Gary was making props for the 0200. Last I heard it was only for the LYC. Alan Thayer got a new one the other day for his Long EZE and it really looked nice. Regards, Off to Golden West in Marysville for the EAA fly in. Jim Patillo N46JP
--- In Q-LIST@..., "Martin" <mskiby@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: CS prop on Q2?
Martin Skiby
I would agree. Also Prince has done a pretty good job. One that I will be trying is the silver bullet from Gary Hertzler. It is a very low drag prop that gives great climb as well as cruise performance.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
--- In Q-LIST@..., Sam Hoskins <sam.hoskins@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: Epoxy
Martin Skiby
I am using EZ Poxy, but you can also use the Aero Poxy as well they are both a high strength structural bond. West should only be used for non structural and fill applications. It does not have a high enough stress rating to be used in a structure layup. This is per the Rutan aircraft factory.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
--- In Q-LIST@..., epadams@... wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: Epoxy
Rick Hole
West is great for non-structural components. I would not build wings,
control surfaces, etc. with it. EZ Poxy is equal to Safety-poxy, time tested, and only a health problem if you are a rat in California :-) Rick Hole N1711Q Q200 panel in final assembly, looking good
|
|
|
|
Re: CS prop on Q2?
Before you go to all that trouble and $$$ for an MT, you might want to give
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Craig Catto a call. He makes great props and really lnows his stuff. http://www.cattoprops.com/ Sam
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 8:39 PM, Richard <mylittlemgb@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: Epoxy
John Loram <johnl@...>
For structural layups I use E-Zpoxy. It seems to me that I've heard of other
structural epoxies, but the E-Zpoxy is what Rutan recommended after the original stuff became unavailable. For filling and sanding I use West System with their Microlight (410) filler. -john- _____ From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...] On Behalf Of epadams@... Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2011 10:20 AM To: Q-LIST@... Subject: [Q-LIST] Epoxy What type epoxy is everyone using these days is it E-Zpoxy or some other brand. Does anyone have any of the old safe-t-poxy hardener (Part D hardener) that is still good and unopened. I know there is a health risk with it and some say it's not good but there are a lot of aircraft built with this old epoxy. Please reply (epadams@... <mailto:epadams%40frontier.com> ).
|
|
|
|
Re: CS prop on Q2?
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Myself and Earnest Martin have MT props on TriQ 200s. I love the prop! You will too.Bruce Crain ---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Richard" <mylittlemgb@...> To: Q-LIST@... Subject: [Q-LIST] Re: CS prop on Q2? Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 01:39:08 -0000 Myself I would use the MT prop, I have had the chance to fly behind the Woodcomp prop and it is a nice unit. From what I have seen the MT seems to be the most used option. Regardless you won't be going wrong. When using a fixed pitch prop you're compromising on cruise and climb. The cost is the reason most go with the fixed pitch and ground adjustable gives the opportunity to change your mind. Constant speed gives you all the above. Richard --- In Q-LIST@..., "flyboy" <patrickrameau@...> wrote: > > My Tri-Q200 has a Warp Drive, ground-adjustable prop. Being in a hot, high area (Arizona), I would love to have choices beyond "stuck with climb prop or stuck with cruise prop." Do any Quickies have an in-flight adjustable prop installed? Anyone have experience using them with an 0-200? www.woodcomp.com is a Czech company that makes an electric one, as does www.ivoprop.com, and the prices seem reasonable. Does anyone know any sound mechanical/aerodynamic reasons NOT to proceed with that plan? Are they really as "bolt and fly" as their websites claim? > While I love my new Quickie, both the climb (when loaded) and the top speed seem less than they should be. Thanks in advance! > ____________________________________________________________ Penny Stock Soaring 3000% Sign up for Free to find out what the next 3000% Stock Winner is! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4df17eb5ce0f331af3dst06vuc
|
|
|
|
Re: Epoxy
Richard <mylittlemgb@...>
I find myself using more West Systems Epoxy. The biggest reason why is I can pick it up at any boat shop. This saves me in shipping cost and I hate to wait for things to come in. Most of the time I find out I need more when I need to get something done quick. This saves me in the event of my poor planning. E-Z Poxy and Poly Epoxy also work very well. Just try to stay away from Vinyl Ester the stuff is very bad for your heath unless you take the proper precausions like Tyvex suite and fresh air mask.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
--- In Q-LIST@..., epadams@... wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: CS prop on Q2?
Richard <mylittlemgb@...>
Myself I would use the MT prop, I have had the chance to fly behind the Woodcomp prop and it is a nice unit. From what I have seen the MT seems to be the most used option. Regardless you won't be going wrong. When using a fixed pitch prop you're compromising on cruise and climb. The cost is the reason most go with the fixed pitch and ground adjustable gives the opportunity to change your mind. Constant speed gives you all the above.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Richard
--- In Q-LIST@..., "flyboy" <patrickrameau@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: CS prop on Q2?
Deems Herring
I don't get anything related to propellers from the first one but my experience with the Ivo prop is that the airfoil is not optimized for the diameter / speed requirements of Q's. Bruce run's an MT I believe and I am sure he will chime in here.
I haven't tried one yet but you might check with these guys: http://www.variprop.com/products.html What kind of static rpm vs cruise rpm are you seeing for a given pitch/ Deems ________________________________ From: flyboy <patrickrameau@...> To: Q-LIST@... Sent: Thursday, June 9, 2011 4:52 PM Subject: [Q-LIST] CS prop on Q2? My Tri-Q200 has a Warp Drive, ground-adjustable prop. Being in a hot, high area (Arizona), I would love to have choices beyond "stuck with climb prop or stuck with cruise prop." Do any Quickies have an in-flight adjustable prop installed? Anyone have experience using them with an 0-200? www.woodcomp.com is a Czech company that makes an electric one, as does www.ivoprop.com, and the prices seem reasonable. Does anyone know any sound mechanical/aerodynamic reasons NOT to proceed with that plan? Are they really as "bolt and fly" as their websites claim? While I love my new Quickie, both the climb (when loaded) and the top speed seem less than they should be. Thanks in advance! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
|
|
|
CS prop on Q2?
Patrick Rameau
My Tri-Q200 has a Warp Drive, ground-adjustable prop. Being in a hot, high area (Arizona), I would love to have choices beyond "stuck with climb prop or stuck with cruise prop." Do any Quickies have an in-flight adjustable prop installed? Anyone have experience using them with an 0-200? www.woodcomp.com is a Czech company that makes an electric one, as does www.ivoprop.com, and the prices seem reasonable. Does anyone know any sound mechanical/aerodynamic reasons NOT to proceed with that plan? Are they really as "bolt and fly" as their websites claim?
While I love my new Quickie, both the climb (when loaded) and the top speed seem less than they should be. Thanks in advance!
|
|
|
|
Nice looking Dragonfly - Mark II - on eBay
quickheads
Have a look, seems to be in good shape to me:
http://tinyurl.com/3le254d Cheers, Dan Yager QBA Editor www.quickheads.com
|
|
|
|
Alternative Engine Round-Up - #8
Patrick P <panzera@...>
Friends,
This is my last note on the subject. If you have an aircraft powered by an alternative engine and you are willing to fly it in to Golden West on Saturday, June 11th, to share it with others who will appreciate what you've done, here is your ticket (for you and your passengers) to attend for free. http://www.contactmagazine.com/Downloads/GW-AER.pdf Once you land, just show it to the parking people (simply hold it up in your windscreen) to get directed to our parking location: http://www.contactmagazine.com/Roundup/Parking-a.jpg If you need to speak to me I'll be on the road most of tomorrow but will answer my mail later in the day. Editor@... See ya there! Pat Free CONTACT! Magazine issues: http://www.issuu.com/panzera
|
|
|
|
Epoxy
epadams@...
What type epoxy is everyone using these days is it E-Zpoxy or some other brand. Does anyone have any of the old safe-t-poxy hardener (Part D hardener) that is still good and unopened. I know there is a health risk with it and some say it's not good but there are a lot of aircraft built with this old epoxy. Please reply (epadams@...).
|
|
|
|
For The Why???
Rich Gillen
Hello Bounds:
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
None of Rotax's 2 cycle engines, and most of their 4 strokes, are not certified for airplane use. If you don't understand any engines limitations, whether it's a 503UL or a 500 sled motor, a 582UL or a 583, out of a sled. They are both, doomed to fail. A 337UL, 447UL, 503UL, 532UL, 582UL, 618UL's, all fail to. Whether it be, cranks, rods, pistons, bearings, gaskets, oil injection, high rpm's, etc. Using poor fuel(low octane) is probably the leading cause of most failures from my research. Different 2 cycle oils do play into the mix as well. There are usually many reasons why any motor fails. Some times it's a chain reaction of events. Some times, it's hard to isolate the problem. I said to run the sled motors along the same guide lines(That's RPM's, Maintenance, pipe, etc) as the UL motors, and they should give you the same, but cheaper service life. Of course, I expect you to do a total basic rebuild on the motor, not just pull it out of a high mileage sled and go flying. Unless you know the history of the motor personally. Like if, it was just recently all rebuilt, and had very low hours on it still, then I probably wouldn't do it either, as long as I new the history. Just a couple of weeks ago, a guy lost his 582UL crank with only 220hrs on a brand new engine on one of my groups. Another had a rod go and wrecked the block. I believe the crank guy was quoted $1600 for just a new crank, not including labor. A 582UL block is around $2500 I think. Yet another guy has 1200 hrs on his original 582 crank. _http://jbmindustries.com/582.html_ (http://jbmindustries.com/582.html) Other than a dual plug head, dual ignition, and a different pipe, and the block drilled and tapped with the Provision 8 holes. Otherwise their about identical, even have a lot of the same part numbers. Some sled motors have RAVE valves, like the 618UL does. They also made a 580(same bore & stroke as a 582) with out RAVE valves. UL motors don't have any special "heat rejection capability" as you say. You simply have air cooled motors, and water cooled motors. Water cooled motors seem to last longer and have higher HP numbers than air cooled motors! Skidoo/Rotax still makes a 550F, 2011. I have seen 57hp - 72hp at 6500rpm numbers, depending on year. UL motors are just not run, at the higher sled MAX RPM's. Most 447UL - 582UL motors are listed at, MAX 6500rpm, the 618UL was listed at MAX 6800rpm. Most sled engines, HP numbers, are listed between 7800rpm - 8400rpm. Most people fly between 4000rpm - 6250rpm with UL motors. A 670 makes 97hp at 6600rpm, 90.1hp at 6400rpm, still makes 59.7hp at 5000rpm's. There are Dyno sheets to prove, not guess, what most Rotax engines used in planes, make at what rpm. Here is one web site, that has UL motors and some sled motors with UL pipes that were Dyno tested. _http://www.rotaxservices.com/dyno.html_ (http://www.rotaxservices.com/dyno.html) Rich Gillen Ames, IA ============================================================================ ============================== 4b. Re: For The Why??? Posted by: "Robert Bounds" rebounds@... boundsie2000 Date: Fri Jun 3, 2011 4:49 pm ((PDT))
----- Original Message -----
From: Armilite@... To: Q-LIST@... Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 3:34 PM Subject: [Q-LIST] For The Why??? Reggie: The Super Quickie(Q1) conversion was I think a 503UL(50hp) air cooled engine. Even a 447UL(40hp) was a great improvement, since it came only with a 22hp Onan generator engine originally. There was a guy who put a 583(97hp) sled motor in a Quickie(Q1) many years ago, movie still on YouTube. Don't know any facts about the engine/drive combo, if it had been rebuilt, or just pulled out of a sled and put in the plane, or what RPM's he ran, or what fuel he used, or what pipe he used, or what oil he was running in it, etc. Be nice to know all the data. Guys, I flew a Super Q-1 for 250 hours many years ago. It performed great after I finally figured out the tuning. The guy with the 583 Q-1 was known as "Captain Nitro". So named by Masal for his plan to add a nitrous injection system to his engine. I can't recall the guys real name. The plane was a tremendous performer. Yeehaa! That engine sawed the case in two when it broke a rod after a few hours in the air. These sled motors are not suitable for aircraft use. PERIOD! They don't have the heat rejection capability that's necessary at the continuous high power settings that aircraft run. 503's and 582's may seem like they are grossly detuned but that's what it takes to operate in an aircraft. If you want to try this stuff, do it on a Quicksilver or a powered parachute, not on a Q-1. With their high landing speeds and tiny wheels, Q's don't do well landing in grandpa's wheat field. Ahhh. I'm okay now. Sorry. I just don't want to see anybody hurt in an airplane that is as fun as a Q. Bounds
|
|
|
|
Re: Big Muddy Race results
quickheads
Congrats Sam! Great Job! 210! Whoo-Hoo!
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Awesome! Dan Yager QBA Editor www.quickheads.com
On Sun, 5 Jun 2011 08:58:33 -0500, Sam Hoskins wrote:
The 2011 Big Muddy Air Race is now in the bag!
|
|
|