1. Topics
  2. Anything else on a $12,500 budget?

Anything else on a $12,500 budget?

Rich Gillen
 

 
Jon:
 
Your going to pay big $$$ for any 100hp, with a 2000hr TBO engine.
 
O-200 2000hr TBO $22,000+ for a new one, $12-14,000 for a rebuilt one. If your a real good scrounger, and do all the work, maybe $8000. Core engines were going for around $4000+. Lots of O-200 parts on ebay.
 
Rotax 912(80hp) $18,000+
 
Rotax 912(100hp) $20,000-25,000 depending on options, with a 2000hr TBO
 
Rotax 914(115hp) $34,000+
 
Hirth (100hp) $12-14,000 new with a 1000hr TBO at 75% power.
 
Rotax 582UL(65hp) $6000 300hr TBO. Some People, have gotten over 1300hrs on there 503s, and 582s, and still flying them. Some People have had problems with theirs at 120hrs.
 
Skidoo 670(90hp) Conversion from Rotax Rick with a 450hr TBO around $4500+. A Rotax rebuild can vary from $500 to $2000. Rick, rebuilds Cranks with all new parts.
 
Rotax UL 2 Stroke motors are Skidoo Sled motors from the 80s, and 90s, Piston Port, and RV motors. All late 92/93 to 99 Skidoos have the Provision 8 Boss's for the Rotax gear Drives, there just not finish machined. All Skidoo's, I think, 1980 to 1992 have the Provision 4 Boss's, before that, they had provision 3 Boss's, before that Belt Drive only. Rotax 2 Stroke UL motors, got a Dual Plug Head in, I think late 1992, and switched to Ducati Dual Ignition from Nippon Single Ignition, also got Cageless Rod Bearings. The only other thing that is different is the Tuned Pipe used. Skidoo did make some variances, like a 580(Two Piece Head), 582(One piece Head), and a 583(RAVE), same core motor as a 582UL. All Skidoo/Rotaxs 521 to 670 use the same head bolt pattern, just different bores.
 
Skidoo 277F = Rotax 277UL Fan(26hp at 6250rpms)
Skidoo 377/380F = Rotax 377UL(35hp at 6500rpms)
Skidoo 447F = Rotax 447UL(40hp at 6500rpms)
Skidoo 503F = Rotax 503UL(50hp at 6500rpms)
Skido 521/536/537 = Rotax 532UL(60hp at 6500rpms)
Skidoo 470 = Rotax 462UL(52hp & 58hp at 6500rpms)
Skdoo 580/582 = Rotax 582UL(65hp at 6500rpms) The 583 had RAVE Valves
Skidoo 617 = Rotax 618UL(73.8hp at 6750rpms)
 
The Skidoo 670, was not made into a UL motor, account Rotax had spent millions on their new 4 Stroke, the big 80hp 912, which cost about $5000 more, than a 618UL at the time, for only a 6.2hp increase. Hence, the demise of the 618UL, which was also a good engine. The introduction of the 670 also in 1992, also helped kill off the 617/618UL. Like I showed before, a stock 670 Dynoed 103.8hp at 6800rpms, whereas the 618UL made 73.8hp at 6750rpms. Both 618UL, and 670 had RAVE Exhaust. Rick says, a 670, when run against a 582UL at the same rpms, gets 1GPH better than the 582UL. R&Ds 618 Tuned Pipe, does have a small flat spot in the lower 4850rpm range, whereas Ricks Pipe does not.
 
For a Q2 Airframe, a good cheap motor, would be a Skidoo 670 conversion, or convert one of the newer 2000+ Sled Motors. An Arctic Cat 800HO(160hp at 8000rpms) probably makes about 120hp at 6500rpms, with Dual Plugs, Fuel Injection. A Skidoo 800HO(160hp at 8000rpms) also probably makes about 120hp at 6500rpms, a Skidoo 600HO(125hp at 8000rpms) probably makes about 90+hp at 6500rpms, all these have a 4/5 Bolt pattern around the PTO for an Adapter Plate. 2000+ cranks are also more HD.
 
We have the Technology to make all of these 2 Strokes better, from different Engine Coatings, to Ceramic Bearings, to Synthetic Fliuds, etc. Ceramic Coatings can drop your Temps by 20% alone.
 
But if you hate 2 Strokes, then the VW, Corvair, Subaru, all with low TBOs also, and the Airplane Certified O-200, Lyc 235 engines in the 100hp range, is your best choices. Not one Airplane Manufacture, that I know of, out of 700+ in the world, has ever adopted a VW, a Corvair, a Subaru, engine for the Airframes. Probably 75% of the 26hp to 100hp Small Airplanes in the world, fly's behind a Rotax.
 
Oh, and if your a Machinist, there was a C90 engine, 3D modeled on www.Grabcad.com to make your own. :)
 
Just My Opinion
Rich
=====================================================================================

1f

Re: Quickie Q2 Revmaster 2100-D

Fri Aug 29, 2014 10:26 am (PDT) . Posted by:

"Jon Matcho" jmatcho

Many are making quite the impression to favor the O-200. I just spent an hour last night trying to find out how to buy an overhauled one. Why must it be this hard? Doesn't seem like much savings from the IO-360 from where I came with in the Cozy project. $$$

I recall Mattituck had experimental O-200 engines at one point, but they appear to be no more. Brand new or rebuilt engines from Continental direct are $24-$29,000. Yikes!

I have narrowed down my engine considerations to these options at this point:

1) Buy and refurbish a Revmaster 2100-D (~$4,000)
2) Buy a new Revmaster 2300 (~$8,000)
3) Buy and build a new AeroVee 2.1 kit (~$8,000) (Sonex's go-to engine)
4) Build an O-200 from Divco with A&P supervision and help (~$10-15,000???) Is this how it's done?
5) Anything else on a $12,500 budget?

Jabiru, ULPower, and Rotax are all great looking engines, but cost of acquisition and ownership are beyond the budget for which I thought making the Cozy-to-Q2 move made sense.

I know I don't need to have an engine until the airframe is done.

Thanks for the feedback, I appreciate it and any other thoughts you might offer.

Jon Matcho

Imminent Q2 builder

 
Jon Matcho <jmatcho@...>
 

Rich wrote:

 

>{a virtual book on Skidoo-Rotax conversions}

 

Interesting stuff.  I'll marvel at everyone else who does these.  My uncle flies a Rotax in his Kolb III ultralight.  I understand a benefit is that, in the event of a prop strike, the reduction box takes the brunt of the impact and is a $2,000 part and minor service job.

 

My take is that the Revmaster 2300 is a solid engine, with all the original 2100 bugs worked out and with new improvements.  Of course it has less than 100hp, and may not be the absolute best engine for the Q2, but if I a brand new Revmaster 2300 showed up at my doorstep I would run with it. 

 

I've done a fair amount of research and had quite the bit of information coming to me on and off list.  Summary points are:

 

* The 2100 series, as originally shipped with the Q2, had issues (and possibly still does, even with the improvements).  That, paired with its sub-100hp seems to be the source of a myth or two out there regarding Quickies in general.

* It may not be worth spending any money on the 2100.

* Nobody has bashed the Revmaster 2300 engine, in this list, in personal email, or on Internet forums as far as I can tell.  Even the Sonex lists, where the AeroVee is standard, the Revmaster 2300 is somewhat revered.

 

This article shows some of the engineering involved at Revmaster:  http://issuu.com/panzera/docs/issue_104.5

I do want to take part in the building and maintenance of an engine, but not so much the engineering itself. 

 

That CAD drawing is beautiful, but would you trust the author's accuracy?  Call it a C-X90 ;-)

 

Thank you!

Jon Matcho

 

From: Q-LIST@... on behalf of Armilite@... [Q-LIST]
Sent: Friday, August 29, 2014 5:27 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: [Q-LIST] Anything else on a $12,500 budget?
 
 

 
Jon:
 
Your going to pay big $$$ for any 100hp, with a 2000hr TBO engine.
 
O-200 2000hr TBO $22,000+ for a new one, $12-14,000 for a rebuilt one. If your a real good scrounger, and do all the work, maybe $8000. Core engines were going for around $4000+. Lots of O-200 parts on ebay.
 
Rotax 912(80hp) $18,000+
 
Rotax 912(100hp) $20,000-25,000 depending on options, with a 2000hr TBO
 
Rotax 914(115hp) $34,000+
 
Hirth (100hp) $12-14,000 new with a 1000hr TBO at 75% power.
 
Rotax 582UL(65hp) $6000 300hr TBO. Some People, have gotten over 1300hrs on there 503s, and 582s, and still flying them. Some People have had problems with theirs at 120hrs.
 
Skidoo 670(90hp) Conversion from Rotax Rick with a 450hr TBO around $4500+. A Rotax rebuild can vary from $500 to $2000. Rick, rebuilds Cranks with all new parts.
 
Rotax UL 2 Stroke motors are Skidoo Sled motors from the 80s, and 90s, Piston Port, and RV motors. All late 92/93 to 99 Skidoos have the Provision 8 Boss's for the Rotax gear Drives, there just not finish machined. All Skidoo's, I think, 1980 to 1992 have the Provision 4 Boss's, before that, they had provision 3 Boss's, before that Belt Drive only. Rotax 2 Stroke UL motors, got a Dual Plug Head in, I think late 1992, and switched to Ducati Dual Ignition from Nippon Single Ignition, also got Cageless Rod Bearings. The only other thing that is different is the Tuned Pipe used. Skidoo did make some variances, like a 580(Two Piece Head), 582(One piece Head), and a 583(RAVE), same core motor as a 582UL. All Skidoo/Rotaxs 521 to 670 use the same head bolt pattern, just different bores.
 
Skidoo 277F = Rotax 277UL Fan(26hp at 6250rpms)
Skidoo 377/380F = Rotax 377UL(35hp at 6500rpms)
Skidoo 447F = Rotax 447UL(40hp at 6500rpms)
Skidoo 503F = Rotax 503UL(50hp at 6500rpms)
Skido 521/536/537 = Rotax 532UL(60hp at 6500rpms)
Skidoo 470 = Rotax 462UL(52hp & 58hp at 6500rpms)
Skdoo 580/582 = Rotax 582UL(65hp at 6500rpms) The 583 had RAVE Valves
Skidoo 617 = Rotax 618UL(73.8hp at 6750rpms)
 
The Skidoo 670, was not made into a UL motor, account Rotax had spent millions on their new 4 Stroke, the big 80hp 912, which cost about $5000 more, than a 618UL at the time, for only a 6.2hp increase. Hence, the demise of the 618UL, which was also a good engine. The introduction of the 670 also in 1992, also helped kill off the 617/618UL. Like I showed before, a stock 670 Dynoed 103.8hp at 6800rpms, whereas the 618UL made 73.8hp at 6750rpms. Both 618UL, and 670 had RAVE Exhaust. Rick says, a 670, when run against a 582UL at the same rpms, gets 1GPH better than the 582UL. R&Ds 618 Tuned Pipe, does have a small flat spot in the lower 4850rpm range, whereas Ricks Pipe does not.
 
For a Q2 Airframe, a good cheap motor, would be a Skidoo 670 conversion, or convert one of the newer 2000+ Sled Motors. An Arctic Cat 800HO(160hp at 8000rpms) probably makes about 120hp at 6500rpms, with Dual Plugs, Fuel Injection. A Skidoo 800HO(160hp at 8000rpms) also probably makes about 120hp at 6500rpms, a Skidoo 600HO(125hp at 8000rpms) probably makes about 90+hp at 6500rpms, all these have a 4/5 Bolt pattern around the PTO for an Adapter Plate. 2000+ cranks are also more HD.
 
We have the Technology to make all of these 2 Strokes better, from different Engine Coatings, to Ceramic Bearings, to Synthetic Fliuds, etc. Ceramic Coatings can drop your Temps by 20% alone.
 
But if you hate 2 Strokes, then the VW, Corvair, Subaru, all with low TBOs also, and the Airplane Certified O-200, Lyc 235 engines in the 100hp range, is your best choices. Not one Airplane Manufacture, that I know of, out of 700+ in the world, has ever adopted a VW, a Corvair, a Subaru, engine for the Airframes. Probably 75% of the 26hp to 100hp Small Airplanes in the world, fly's behind a Rotax.
 
Oh, and if your a Machinist, there was a C90 engine, 3D modeled on www.Grabcad.com to make your own. :)
 
Just My Opinion
Rich
=====================================================================================

1f

Re: Quickie Q2 Revmaster 2100-D

Fri Aug 29, 2014 10:26 am (PDT) . Posted by:

"Jon Matcho" jmatcho

Many are making quite the impression to favor the O-200. I just spent an hour last night trying to find out how to buy an overhauled one. Why must it be this hard? Doesn't seem like much savings from the IO-360 from where I came with in the Cozy project. $$$

I recall Mattituck had experimental O-200 engines at one point, but they appear to be no more. Brand new or rebuilt engines from Continental direct are $24-$29,000. Yikes!

I have narrowed down my engine considerations to these options at this point:

1) Buy and refurbish a Revmaster 2100-D (~$4,000)
2) Buy a new Revmaster 2300 (~$8,000)
3) Buy and build a new AeroVee 2.1 kit (~$8,000) (Sonex's go-to engine)
4) Build an O-200 from Divco with A&P supervision and help (~$10-15,000???) Is this how it's done?
5) Anything else on a $12,500 budget?

Jabiru, ULPower, and Rotax are all great looking engines, but cost of acquisition and ownership are beyond the budget for which I thought making the Cozy-to-Q2 move made sense.

I know I don't need to have an engine until the airframe is done.

Thanks for the feedback, I appreciate it and any other thoughts you might offer.

Jon Matcho

Imminent Q2 builder

 

Rich Gillen
 

Ok, lets talk Revmaster 2300. Looks like 85hp for $8000. I didn't see what the TBO was for it?
 
What is the highest TBO of any Revmaster 2300 flying, that you have found in your research? How many have you found, that are really flying?
 
I believe a guy called John Finley, spent about 20 years, trying to make a Subaru work in a Q2, before he gave up. I wonder how many hours, and $$$, he spent?
 
For $8000, I would rebuild a used O-200 core engine, and have a 100hp+ engine, or buy the parts New/Used off ebay/Barnstormers to assemble one, maybe even cheaper. Here is a parts manual with all part numbers.
 
Some New O-200 parts with prices. Make a Spreadsheet with all the Part numbers, with a New Prices column, and what you find on ebay, Barnstormers column. I bet if you look real hard, you can come in less than $8000.
 
For example: You can buy a O-200 Cam off ebay(I paid $29 for mine), send it to a CAM Grinder, and have it touched up, or reground with a new profile. I have seen used O-200 Case's go for $250-$400 on ebay.
 
Remember, it's for an Experimental Airplane, it doesn't have to be Certified also. Building any of these engines, isn't Rocket Science! There are books, videos, etc., to learn how, and what to do.
 
You say, "That CAD drawing is beautiful, but would you trust the author's accuracy? Call it a C-X90. " Yes, I would, he is a Russian Engineering Student. That model was for his finals. But before spending any $$$ making anything, I would always double check the part to be made. If you make it, you can call it what you want. When a New O-200 Cam is like $800+, a Crank $3500, Complete Cylinders $800+ each, etc. Buying some New NOS, or good used parts, is appealing.
 
Just My Opinion
Rich
===============================================================================

3b

Re: Anything else on a $12,500 budget?

Fri Aug 29, 2014 3:27 pm (PDT) . Posted by:

"Jon Matcho" jmatcho

Rich wrote:

>{a virtual book on Skidoo-Rotax conversions}

Interesting stuff. I'll marvel at everyone else who does these. My uncle flies a Rotax in his Kolb III ultralight. I understand a benefit is that, in the event of a prop strike, the reduction box takes the brunt of the impact and is a $2,000 part and minor service job.

My take is that the Revmaster 2300 is a solid engine, with all the original 2100 bugs worked out and with new improvements. Of course it has less than 100hp, and may not be the absolute best engine for the Q2, but if I a brand new Revmaster 2300 showed up at my doorstep I would run with it.

I've done a fair amount of research and had quite the bit of information coming to me on and off list. Summary points are:

* The 2100 series, as originally shipped with the Q2, had issues (and possibly still does, even with the improvements). That, paired with its sub-100hp seems to be the source of a myth or two out there regarding Quickies in general.

* It may not be worth spending any money on the 2100.

* Nobody has bashed the Revmaster 2300 engine, in this list, in personal email, or on Internet forums as far as I can tell. Even the Sonex lists, where the AeroVee is standard, the Revmaster 2300 is somewhat revered.

This article shows some of the engineering involved at Revmaster: http://issuu.com/panzera/docs/issue_104.5

I do want to take part in the building and maintenance of an engine, but not so much the engineering itself.

That CAD drawing is beautiful, but would you trust the author's accuracy? Call it a C-X90 ;-)

Thank you!

Jon Matcho

 
One Sky Dog
 

Rich,

Projected TBO numbers are useless the R-2300 was engineered and tested extensively by Revmaster. Give Joe a call and talk to him and he will tell you how they developed the engine.

Rebuilding a runout O-200 with EBay parts will not get you an engine that will make projected TBO.

Regards,

Charlie Johnson
Ogden, UT



On Aug 30, 2014, at 4:19 AM, "Armilite@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> wrote:

Ok, lets talk Revmaster 2300. Looks like 85hp for $8000. I didn't see what the TBO was for it?
 
What is the highest TBO of any Revmaster 2300 flying, that you have found in your research? How many have you found, that are really flying?
 
I believe a guy called John Finley, spent about 20 years, trying to make a Subaru work in a Q2, before he gave up. I wonder how many hours, and $$$, he spent?
 
For $8000, I would rebuild a used O-200 core engine, and have a 100hp+ engine, or buy the parts New/Used off ebay/Barnstormers to assemble one, maybe even cheaper. Here is a parts manual with all part numbers.
 
Some New O-200 parts with prices. Make a Spreadsheet with all the Part numbers, with a New Prices column, and what you find on ebay, Barnstormers column. I bet if you look real hard, you can come in less than $8000.
 
For example: You can buy a O-200 Cam off ebay(I paid $29 for mine), send it to a CAM Grinder, and have it touched up, or reground with a new profile. I have seen used O-200 Case's go for $250-$400 on ebay.
 
Remember, it's for an Experimental Airplane, it doesn't have to be Certified also. Building any of these engines, isn't Rocket Science! There are books, videos, etc., to learn how, and what to do.
 
You say, "That CAD drawing is beautiful, but would you trust the author's accuracy? Call it a C-X90. " Yes, I would, he is a Russian Engineering Student. That model was for his finals. But before spending any $$$ making anything, I would always double check the part to be made. If you make it, you can call it what you want. When a New O-200 Cam is like $800+, a Crank $3500, Complete Cylinders $800+ each, etc. Buying some New NOS, or good used parts, is appealing.
 
Just My Opinion
Rich
===============================================================================

3b

Re: Anything else on a $12,500 budget?

Fri Aug 29, 2014 3:27 pm (PDT) . Posted by:

"Jon Matcho" jmatcho

Rich wrote:

>{a virtual book on Skidoo-Rotax conversions}

Interesting stuff. I'll marvel at everyone else who does these. My uncle flies a Rotax in his Kolb III ultralight. I understand a benefit is that, in the event of a prop strike, the reduction box takes the brunt of the impact and is a $2,000 part and minor service job.

My take is that the Revmaster 2300 is a solid engine, with all the original 2100 bugs worked out and with new improvements. Of course it has less than 100hp, and may not be the absolute best engine for the Q2, but if I a brand new Revmaster 2300 showed up at my doorstep I would run with it.

I've done a fair amount of research and had quite the bit of information coming to me on and off list. Summary points are:

* The 2100 series, as originally shipped with the Q2, had issues (and possibly still does, even with the improvements). That, paired with its sub-100hp seems to be the source of a myth or two out there regarding Quickies in general.

* It may not be worth spending any money on the 2100.

* Nobody has bashed the Revmaster 2300 engine, in this list, in personal email, or on Internet forums as far as I can tell. Even the Sonex lists, where the AeroVee is standard, the Revmaster 2300 is somewhat revered.

This article shows some of the engineering involved at Revmaster: http://issuu.com/panzera/docs/issue_104.5

I do want to take part in the building and maintenance of an engine, but not so much the engineering itself.

That CAD drawing is beautiful, but would you trust the author's accuracy? Call it a C-X90 ;-)

Thank you!

Jon Matcho

 

Jon Matcho <jmatcho@...>
 

Rich wrote:

 

>What is the highest TBO of any Revmaster 2300 flying, that you have found in your research? How many have you found, that are really flying?

 

I have only found a few and, as I wrote, there have been no complaints or quirks with the 2300 unlike all other auto conversions.  TBO is TBD.

 

>For $8000, I would rebuild a used O-200 core engine, and have a 100hp+ engine...

 

That's another option, with the upside that running Q200s have higher resale value than "those unreliable auto conversions".

 

The Revmaster 2300 just about cannot be called an auto conversion at this point.  There are hardly any parts left from an actual VW in it with all its purpose-built proprietary parts.  I don't see at all why it shouldn't be a consideration for new Q2 builds.  Isn't the point of the Quickie to be affordable and approachable?  Oh yeah, and safe.

 

>Building any of these engines, isn't Rocket Science! There are books, videos, etc., to learn how, and what to do.

 

True.  A Long-EZ flyer made an impression on me when talking about his Lycoming.  He asked, "Did you ever rebuild a lawnmower engine?"  "Yes", I replied.  "Well then you can handle these engines."

 

>(Regarding whether you would trust that C90 CAD model)

>Yes, I would, he is a Russian Engineering Student. That model was for his finals. But before spending any $$$ making anything, I would always double check the part to be made.

 

My point was how much "double checking" this student did.  I assume he had a C90 in-hand and measured each and every single part with a micrometer.  You also have to assume that the C90 he used was unmodified and up to factory tolerances (perfect overhaul).  Making that leap of faith and then machining something requires knowing what metal formulations are needed (certainly possible, but much more work).  After machining you'll have a part that is 0.5mm larger/smaller than the one you're comparing with -- all parts will NOT be the same size as the factory castings (whatever those sizes officially are).  Make another leap of faith, put the whole thing together, and fly.  Now that would be an absolute remarkable achievement that I would love to read about.  The model is impressive in its own right.

 

>Just My Opinion

 

Same.  I am not looking to build and fly a proven airframe-engine combination without excessive re-engineering.  I consider these the options for ME at this point (no discredit whatsoever to anyone who's suggested or favored anything else -- go for it):

 

1) Q200 with rebuilt Continental O-200

2) Q2 with a new Revmaster 2300

3) Q2 with updated Revmaster 2100 (done by Revmaster)

 

Many other engines are appealing and viable, but I don't want to afford them and/or do the one-off work required.

 

Thanks everyone for all your feedback and patience from this "newbie".  Off to do something... :-)

 

Jon

 

From: Q-LIST@... on behalf of Armilite@... [Q-LIST]
Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2014 6:19 AM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: [Q-LIST] Re: Anything else on a $12,500 budget?
 
 

Ok, lets talk Revmaster 2300. Looks like 85hp for $8000. I didn't see what the TBO was for it?
 
What is the highest TBO of any Revmaster 2300 flying, that you have found in your research? How many have you found, that are really flying?
 
I believe a guy called John Finley, spent about 20 years, trying to make a Subaru work in a Q2, before he gave up. I wonder how many hours, and $$$, he spent?
 
For $8000, I would rebuild a used O-200 core engine, and have a 100hp+ engine, or buy the parts New/Used off ebay/Barnstormers to assemble one, maybe even cheaper. Here is a parts manual with all part numbers.
 
Some New O-200 parts with prices. Make a Spreadsheet with all the Part numbers, with a New Prices column, and what you find on ebay, Barnstormers column. I bet if you look real hard, you can come in less than $8000.
 
For example: You can buy a O-200 Cam off ebay(I paid $29 for mine), send it to a CAM Grinder, and have it touched up, or reground with a new profile. I have seen used O-200 Case's go for $250-$400 on ebay.
 
Remember, it's for an Experimental Airplane, it doesn't have to be Certified also. Building any of these engines, isn't Rocket Science! There are books, videos, etc., to learn how, and what to do.
 
You say, "That CAD drawing is beautiful, but would you trust the author's accuracy? Call it a C-X90. " Yes, I would, he is a Russian Engineering Student. That model was for his finals. But before spending any $$$ making anything, I would always double check the part to be made. If you make it, you can call it what you want. When a New O-200 Cam is like $800+, a Crank $3500, Complete Cylinders $800+ each, etc. Buying some New NOS, or good used parts, is appealing.
 
Just My Opinion
Rich
===============================================================================

3b

Re: Anything else on a $12,500 budget?

Fri Aug 29, 2014 3:27 pm (PDT) . Posted by:

"Jon Matcho" jmatcho

Rich wrote:

>{a virtual book on Skidoo-Rotax conversions}

Interesting stuff. I'll marvel at everyone else who does these. My uncle flies a Rotax in his Kolb III ultralight. I understand a benefit is that, in the event of a prop strike, the reduction box takes the brunt of the impact and is a $2,000 part and minor service job.

My take is that the Revmaster 2300 is a solid engine, with all the original 2100 bugs worked out and with new improvements. Of course it has less than 100hp, and may not be the absolute best engine for the Q2, but if I a brand new Revmaster 2300 showed up at my doorstep I would run with it.

I've done a fair amount of research and had quite the bit of information coming to me on and off list. Summary points are:

* The 2100 series, as originally shipped with the Q2, had issues (and possibly still does, even with the improvements). That, paired with its sub-100hp seems to be the source of a myth or two out there regarding Quickies in general.

* It may not be worth spending any money on the 2100.

* Nobody has bashed the Revmaster 2300 engine, in this list, in personal email, or on Internet forums as far as I can tell. Even the Sonex lists, where the AeroVee is standard, the Revmaster 2300 is somewhat revered.

This article shows some of the engineering involved at Revmaster: http://issuu.com/panzera/docs/issue_104.5

I do want to take part in the building and maintenance of an engine, but not so much the engineering itself.

That CAD drawing is beautiful, but would you trust the author's accuracy? Call it a C-X90 ;-)

Thank you!

Jon Matcho

 

Rick Caldwell
 

Please let me interrupt with a question.

I was looking at a Suburu 40 Hp air cooled industrial twin and was wondering if anyone had looked at them ?

Rick Caldwell

Wyoming Long-EZ builder

 

From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...]
Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2014 4:20 AM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: [Q-LIST] Re: Anything else on a $12,500 budget?

 

 

Ok, lets talk Revmaster 2300. Looks like 85hp for $8000. I didn't see what the TBO was for it?

 

What is the highest TBO of any Revmaster 2300 flying, that you have found in your research? How many have you found, that are really flying?

 

I believe a guy called John Finley, spent about 20 years, trying to make a Subaru work in a Q2, before he gave up. I wonder how many hours, and $$$, he spent?

 

For $8000, I would rebuild a used O-200 core engine, and have a 100hp+ engine, or buy the parts New/Used off ebay/Barnstormers to assemble one, maybe even cheaper. Here is a parts manual with all part numbers.

 

Some New O-200 parts with prices. Make a Spreadsheet with all the Part numbers, with a New Prices column, and what you find on ebay, Barnstormers column. I bet if you look real hard, you can come in less than $8000.

 

For example: You can buy a O-200 Cam off ebay(I paid $29 for mine), send it to a CAM Grinder, and have it touched up, or reground with a new profile. I have seen used O-200 Case's go for $250-$400 on ebay.

 

Remember, it's for an Experimental Airplane, it doesn't have to be Certified also. Building any of these engines, isn't Rocket Science! There are books, videos, etc., to learn how, and what to do.

 

You say, "That CAD drawing is beautiful, but would you trust the author's accuracy? Call it a C-X90. " Yes, I would, he is a Russian Engineering Student. That model was for his finals. But before spending any $$$ making anything, I would always double check the part to be made. If you make it, you can call it what you want. When a New O-200 Cam is like $800+, a Crank $3500, Complete Cylinders $800+ each, etc. Buying some New NOS, or good used parts, is appealing.

 

Just My Opinion

Rich

===============================================================================

Fri Aug 29, 2014 3:27 pm (PDT) . Posted by:

"Jon Matcho" jmatcho

Rich wrote:

>{a virtual book on Skidoo-Rotax conversions}

Interesting stuff. I'll marvel at everyone else who does these. My uncle flies a Rotax in his Kolb III ultralight. I understand a benefit is that, in the event of a prop strike, the reduction box takes the brunt of the impact and is a $2,000 part and minor service job.

My take is that the Revmaster 2300 is a solid engine, with all the original 2100 bugs worked out and with new improvements. Of course it has less than 100hp, and may not be the absolute best engine for the Q2, but if I a brand new Revmaster 2300 showed up at my doorstep I would run with it.

I've done a fair amount of research and had quite the bit of information coming to me on and off list. Summary points are:

* The 2100 series, as originally shipped with the Q2, had issues (and possibly still does, even with the improvements). That, paired with its sub-100hp seems to be the source of a myth or two out there regarding Quickies in general.

* It may not be worth spending any money on the 2100.

* Nobody has bashed the Revmaster 2300 engine, in this list, in personal email, or on Internet forums as far as I can tell. Even the Sonex lists, where the AeroVee is standard, the Revmaster 2300 is somewhat revered.

This article shows some of the engineering involved at Revmaster: http://issuu.com/panzera/docs/issue_104.5

I do want to take part in the building and maintenance of an engine, but not so much the engineering itself.

That CAD drawing is beautiful, but would you trust the author's accuracy? Call it a C-X90 ;-)

Thank you!

Jon Matcho

 
Rich Gillen
 

Charlie:
 
Your correct. I didn't even see a TBO, let alone a Projected TBO for that R-2300 engine. Till you have some of them engines, actually making 500, 1000, 1500, 2000hrs, you don't really have any idea, what your getting for that $8000. Joe, and the other Manufactures/Builders can say what they want, I like to see the facts, which are Flying Hrs. Just like Hirth's claim of a 1000hr TBO at 75% power on all of their engines. Show me (1) Hirth engine, that has made that 1000hr TBO mark. At least the O-200, was Certified to establish that 2000hr TBO for your $22,000 New, investment.
 
What's the highest Flying hr:
Subaru = ????hr Probably John Finley
Corvair =
Mazda =
VW =
Jabaru =
Rotax 912 =
Rotax 582UL = I have seen 1300hrs and still flying. Both use lower max rpms. The 582UL guy takes off at Max 5500rpms. New 582UL motors are around $5534 today from Lockwood.
Rotax 503UL = I have seen 1300hrs and still flying.
etc?
 
A guy e-mailed off list, he has 500hrs on his Subaru EA81 with a Turbo, using it in direct drive configuration on a Dragonfly. Didn't say what HP he was making at them Direct Drive RPMS. I would guess 55-60hp at those low Direct Drive rpms with a Turbo. His engine cost him to build $3000. Even at 2000hr/500hr = 4, $3000x4= $12,000 he is ahead of the $$$ game. $22,000 new vs $12,000 used/rebuilt. But you also have to factor in all your down time doing those rebuilds.
 
Charlie, there is a lot of NEW, NOS(New Old Stock), parts on ebay, and Barnstormers, etc. The Big Expensive parts like the Case, Crank, CAM, etc., can all be rebuilt. Most of the high wear parts will be all replaced with new parts. If the used parts make spec., they can be reused. Since it's for an Experimental, you can use aftermarket parts also. That PDF I gave a link to, gave a list of every part to O Time a O-200.
 
On Barnstormers right now.
CONTINENTAL O-200A (CORE) • $3,450 • FOR SALE • O200A, 329 SMOH(Field O/H in 1984)(Prop Strike-Rough-Sell AS-IS)$3,450(Photo on our w/s..Look us up) • Contact Tim Or Alex - DAWSON AIRCRAFT, INC, Owner - located Clinton, AR USA • Telephone: 501-745-5300 . • Posted August 26, 2014
 
ALTERNATOR FOR O-200 A • $100 • CLEANING OUT THE HANGAR • Alternator for O-200 A continental • Contact Darrin C. Ries, Owner - located Ft Myers, FL USA • Telephone: 239-560-3184 • Posted August 24, 2014
 
0200 C85 A65 C90 0300 C145 C75 • OPPORTUNITY KNOCKING!! DON'T MISS OUT • Parting several engines. Yellow tagged & As Removed Parts Available. • Contact Tom Romanchik located Nesq, PA USA • Telephone: 570-956-2385 • Posted August 21, 2014
 
For $8000 for a R-2300 80hp, with an unknown TBO History, I still stand by, that a O-200(100hp) built from scratch ebay, Barnstormer parts, or a core engine, would be much better. But that R-2300 did look pretty!
 
ebay
 SA24878, 24878, New / nos Continental C85 / C90 / O-200 / O-300 Engine Screw
  • $19.99
  • Buy It Now

Continental Pistons NOS NEW 646255 O200-O300 NOS 3 Available Charity item

  • $159.95
  • Buy It Now
If you have the time to collect the parts, you can save a lot of money, to build a O-200!
 
Just My Opinion
Rich
 
======================================================================================

2b

Re: Anything else on a $12,500 budget?

Sat Aug 30, 2014 4:18 am (PDT) . Posted by:

"Charlie" one1skydog

Rich,

Projected TBO numbers are useless the R-2300 was engineered and tested extensively by Revmaster. Give Joe a call and talk to him and he will tell you how they developed the engine.

Rebuilding a runout O-200 with EBay parts will not get you an engine that will make projected TBO.

Regards,

Charlie Johnson
Ogden, UT

 
Rich Gillen
 

 
Jon:
 
Is that $12,500 your engine budget, or total plane budget?

2c

Re: Anything else on a $12,500 budget?

Sat Aug 30, 2014 5:47 am (PDT) . Posted by:

"Jon Matcho" jmatcho

Rich wrote:

>What is the highest TBO of any Revmaster 2300 flying, that you have found in your research? How many have you found, that are really flying?

I have only found a few and, as I wrote, there have been no complaints or quirks with the 2300 unlike all other auto conversions. TBO is TBD.

======> That's what happens when you just have a few, really flying them. Till you see someone( I would like to see at least a 100 engines), really making some high hours on one, I would save my money, and wait, unless you like being these Companies Test Pilot. All of these Companies/Engine Builders can Test there own engines to prove them. Even on a Test Stand, you can simulate flying rpms. What's it cost to run a R-2300 GPH for just a 500hr test to really prove it? Let's just say 5 GPH at criuse rpms, 500hrs x 5GPH = 2500gals. 2500gals x $3.75 for 91octane = $9375. A torture test could be run 24/7 till done. 500/24= 20.8 days. These People/Manufactures, want YOU, to be there Test Pilot. Like I told one 2 Stroke builder, get some hrs on your engine, to really prove it makes 450hrs, 600hrs, etc. Even if you have to donate your time, and do a rebuild for free for someone local, who may volinteer to fly it. Find a farmer/business who runs a water/air pump/generator continiously for many hrs, who can document the hrs run. But if you like being someones Test Pilot, by all means, jump right in. A Military 10kw generator use's a 084 small Continetal that turns I believe 3400rpms countinious, hooked direct drive. In a plane it's rated around 45-46hp. Many people have gotten well over a 1000hrs on them flying. Any of these People/Companies could hook a VW/Subaru/Corvair/Mazda, etc., to do some testing on there own. They could use the generator to power something to recoupe some of there Investment. But most don't, they want You, to be there Tester.

>For $8000, I would rebuild a used O-200 core engine, and have a 100hp+ engine...

That's another option, with the upside that running Q200s have higher resale value than "those unreliable auto conversions".

=======> Sadly, most Qs/Dragonflys, and other Kitplanes, don't have a High Resale value. You could probably buy a Q200/Dragonfly with a O-200 for $10,000 to $18,000 and be flying. I believe a Q2 kit cost around $9000 new, before they went out of business. Many years ago, I passed on a TriQ200 for $8000 asking price, mainly because it had sat for 5 years without being started, or even turned over. I didn't know much about the O-200 back then, but that it was expensive to rebuild. Like you, I was figuring I might have to spend another $12,000 to get the engine rebuilt, and another $3000 to get the plane the way I wanted it. So $8000+$12,000+$3000 = $23,000. For $23,000 back then, I could have bought a nice used Cessna.

The Revmaster 2300 just about cannot be called an auto conversion at this point. There are hardly any parts left from an actual VW in it with all its purpose-built proprietary parts. I don't see at all why it shouldn't be a consideration for new Q2 builds. Isn't the point of the Quickie to be affordable and approachable? Oh yeah, and safe.
========> No, we call it an Experimental HD Engine, till it has proven to make at least a 1000+ Flying hrs. The point of any Kitplane, is to make it more affordable to the people who can't afford a new $180,000 Cessna 172. In todays $$$, a $9000 kit plane in 1980 would cost $28,000+ today. You still have to buy the engine, Instruments, etc.

>Building any of these engines, isn't Rocket Science! There are books, videos, etc., to learn how, and what to do.

True. A Long-EZ flyer made an impression on me when talking about his Lycoming. He asked, "Did you ever rebuild a lawnmower engine?" "Yes", I replied. "Well then you can handle these engines."
=====> Thats True, but you probably had the tools to work on the lawn mower engine, the O-200, Rotax's, etc. do require some special tools to work on them, and the parts are 3-5 times as much for just a Rotax. :)

>(Regarding whether you would trust that C90 CAD model)

>Yes, I would, he is a Russian Engineering Student. That model was for his finals. But before spending any $$$ making anything, I would always double check the part to be made.

My point was how much "double checking" this student did. I assume he had a C90 in-hand and measured each and every single part with a micrometer. You also have to assume that the C90 he used was unmodified and up to factory tolerances (perfect overhaul). Making that leap of faith and then machining something requires knowing what metal formulations are needed (certainly possible, but much more work). After machining you'll have a part that is 0.5mm larger/smaller than the one you're comparing with -- all parts will NOT be the same size as the factory castings (whatever those sizes officially are). Make another leap of faith, put the whole thing together, and fly. Now that would be an absolute remarkable achievement that I would love to read about. The model is impressive in its own right.
=======> I assumed, you would be CNC/Machining it, for yourself, and compare the 3D Model to new parts. He has done the hard part, 3D Modeling it. You, can tweak it, to your own Spec's if you want. You can use different Bores, Strokes, Fuel Injection, Change Cams, or you can even retrofit it, with HD RACING parts from other engines, but that takes a lot of time. Just like you can change over from Black Rubber O-rings that melt at 200 degrees if you put them in a fry pan, or use the new High Temp ones that won't melt till 500 degrees. Any Engine, can be improved upon. Even the O-200. Contenetal can't do it much without having to go through recertification, but you can. You wouldn't be making every part, just the big ticket items, if you can. Building these engines isn't rocket science, and neither is making the parts. You have kids/adults CNC machining AR15 Recievers, Turbine Blades, etc., on Youtube, on small hobby cnc mills. Used Industrial CNC mills, and lathes are cheap, $2000 to $8000. A Billet Skidoo/Polaris/Yamaha/Arctic Cat, Race head, cost $400 on ebay. A Rotax 582UL cast head cost $820. A block of 6061 AL, 7" x 11" x 2", on ebay sells for about $25-$30 on ebay. Granted, for a one off, it would be cheaper/faster to just buy the NOS/Used parts. But if, your a machinist, with connections to the right CNC stuff, or even bought used stuff, and know enough about CAD, you could make some of your own parts. You can always resell the tools. I was at a Car show 2 years ago, and a big Manufacture of RACE Car parts had all of them laid out on his table to view. I picked up a CAM, and asked him what the cost was, well a standard Hyd Cam starts out around $50, a Solid Cam is about $90, and a roller cam is around $300. I asked him, what if he could get $1800 for it, he laughed, what are you talking about. I said, something your not even thinking about, that's what I had heard a O-200 Cam cost. Now, do you really think that $300 HD Roller Cam going into a Hemi/Chevy SB/BB turning maybe 12,000rpms, is made any less, than a O-200 Cam turning 2750rpms? With the 3D model, you might find a CAM from another 4/6/8 cylinder that might work, or could be adpated. Take just that C90 CAM from the 3D model, and send it to one of the Big Race Car CAM makers, and get a quote to have one made. They make CAMs Special order, just like any Piston maker does. Then get a current O-200 Cam price.

>Just My Opinion

Same. I am not looking to build and fly a proven airframe-engine combination without excessive re-engineering. I consider these the options for ME at this point (no discredit whatsoever to anyone who's suggested or favored anything else -- go for it):

1) Q200 with rebuilt Continental O-200   <----- The Best choice. Research that parts lists, you might be surprized what you could build for $8000 or less, even making some updates.

2) Q2 with a new Revmaster 2300

3) Q2 with updated Revmaster 2100 (done by Revmaster)

Many other engines are appealing and viable, but I don't want to afford them and/or do the one-off work required.

Thanks everyone for all your feedback and patience from this "newbie". Off to do something... :-)

Jon

Rich
 
Murry Rozansky
 

Hi, it is heavy for its power and in no way suitable for a Long EzZ, or two place Q.  Questionable for a Q-1.
 
Murry I. Rozansky
 
 
 

----- Original Message -----
Sent: 8/30/2014 11:56:05 AM
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Re: Anything else on a $12,500 budget?

 

Please let me interrupt with a question.

I was looking at a Suburu 40 Hp air cooled industrial twin and was wondering if anyone had looked at them ?

Rick Caldwell

Wyoming Long-EZ builder

From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...]
Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2014 4:20 AM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: [Q-LIST] Re: Anything else on a $12,500 budget?

 

Ok, lets talk Revmaster 2300. Looks like 85hp for $8000. I didn't see what the TBO was for it?

What is the highest TBO of any Revmaster 2300 flying, that you have found in your research? How many have you found, that are really flying?

I believe a guy called John Finley, spent about 20 years, trying to make a Subaru work in a Q2, before he gave up. I wonder how many hours, and $$$, he spent?

For $8000, I would rebuild a used O-200 core engine, and have a 100hp+ engine, or buy the parts New/Used off ebay/Barnstormers to assemble one, maybe even cheaper. Here is a parts manual with all part numbers.

Some New O-200 parts with prices. Make a Spreadsheet with all the Part numbers, with a New Prices column, and what you find on ebay, Barnstormers column. I bet if you look real hard, you can come in less than $8000.

For example: You can buy a O-200 Cam off ebay(I paid $29 for mine), send it to a CAM Grinder, and have it touched up, or reground with a new profile. I have seen used O-200 Case's go for $250-$400 on ebay.

Remember, it's for an Experimental Airplane, it doesn't have to be Certified also. Building any of these engines, isn't Rocket Science! There are books, videos, etc., to learn how, and what to do.

You say, "That CAD drawing is beautiful, but would you trust the author's accuracy? Call it a C-X90. " Yes, I would, he is a Russian Engineering Student. That model was for his finals. But before spending any $$$ making anything, I would always double check the part to be made. If you make it, you can call it what you want. When a New O-200 Cam is like $800+, a Crank $3500, Complete Cylinders $800+ each, etc. Buying some New NOS, or good used parts, is appealing.

Just My Opinion

Rich

===============================================================================

Fri Aug 29, 2014 3:27 pm (PDT) . Posted by:

"Jon Matcho" jmatcho

Rich wrote:

>{a virtual book on Skidoo-Rotax conversions}

Interesting stuff. I'll marvel at everyone else who does these. My uncle flies a Rotax in his Kolb III ultralight. I understand a benefit is that, in the event of a prop strike, the reduction box takes the brunt of the impact and is a $2,000 part and minor service job.

My take is that the Revmaster 2300 is a solid engine, with all the original 2100 bugs worked out and with new improvements. Of course it has less than 100hp, and may not be the absolute best engine for the Q2, but if I a brand new Revmaster 2300 showed up at my doorstep I would run with it.

I've done a fair amount of research and had quite the bit of information coming to me on and off list. Summary points are:

* The 2100 series, as originally shipped with the Q2, had issues (and possibly still does, even with the improvements). That, paired with its sub-100hp seems to be the source of a myth or two out there regarding Quickies in general.

* It may not be worth spending any money on the 2100.

* Nobody has bashed the Revmaster 2300 engine, in this list, in personal email, or on Internet forums as far as I can tell. Even the Sonex lists, where the AeroVee is standard, the Revmaster 2300 is somewhat revered.

This article shows some of the engineering involved at Revmaster: http://issuu.com/panzera/docs/issue_104.5

I do want to take part in the building and maintenance of an engine, but not so much the engineering itself.

That CAD drawing is beautiful, but would you trust the author's accuracy? Call it a C-X90 ;-)

Thank you!

Jon Matcho
1 - 9 of 9