Revmaster 2100


Jeff Sellars
 

So I still havent even brought my q-2 to an airport yet. The plane is stored 30 miles from my home. at my parents house so I really get time to see that Bird. Whenever I have a free moment I drive 70 miles the opposite direction spend time with my kid Fox 3 and Cessna 172.

That q-2 is such a beautiful plane,.. Everytime I see it, I must sit down for a while and just stare at it's beautiful lines.

The engine only have seven hours on it. But one head is cracked from Tining a head boat too much. I purchased the aircraft in this condition. I am ordering new heads later this month. I hope to get this bird in the Air sometime next year. And I hope to spend the rest of my life enjoying it.

I can't help but to feel a bit afraid of the Revmaster 2100. I wonder if somebody can give me the right words to comfort me. And assure me that it is a good motor and it will not fail.

I wish I could pay somebody a few bucks to go over this injury that is familiar with these. Before I actually fly her.


jnmarstall <jnmarstall@...>
 

Hello Jeff,
I am a former Revmaster flyer until the block cracked at 299.4 hrs over Bowling Green, KY.  Having now converted to the O-200, I can comfortably say that the Q200 is light years ahead in performance over the Revmaster and MUCH more reliable.  I know some people love their VW's ( I used to be one of those) but they will also tell you they spend a lot of time tinkering with valves and buying heads more often than desired.  Having been there and done that, if you want a reliable aircraft to "spend the rest of my life enjoying.." convert it to an O-200 before you fly it.

Jerry

On 10/19/2014 11:24 PM, kitfoxjeff@... [Q-LIST] wrote:
 

So I still havent even brought my q-2 to an airport yet. The plane is stored 30 miles from my home. at my parents house so I really get time to see that Bird. Whenever I have a free moment I drive 70 miles the opposite direction spend time with my kid Fox 3 and Cessna 172.

That q-2 is such a beautiful plane,.. Everytime I see it, I must sit down for a while and just stare at it's beautiful lines.

The engine only have seven hours on it. But one head is cracked from Tining a head boat too much. I purchased the aircraft in this condition. I am ordering new heads later this month. I hope to get this bird in the Air sometime next year. And I hope to spend the rest of my life enjoying it.

I can't help but to feel a bit afraid of the Revmaster 2100. I wonder if somebody can give me the right words to comfort me. And assure me that it is a good motor and it will not fail.

I wish I could pay somebody a few bucks to go over this injury that is familiar with these. Before I actually fly her.



Jeff Sellars
 

Thanks Jerry. I will seriously consider that. Is there any trimwork or modification of the cowling needed?





From: jnmarstall jnmarstall@... [Q-LIST] ;
To: ;
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Revmaster 2100
Sent: Mon, Oct 20, 2014 1:59:23 PM

 

Hello Jeff,
I am a former Revmaster flyer until the block cracked at 299.4 hrs over Bowling Green, KY.  Having now converted to the O-200, I can comfortably say that the Q200 is light years ahead in performance over the Revmaster and MUCH more reliable.  I know some people love their VW's ( I used to be one of those) but they will also tell you they spend a lot of time tinkering with valves and buying heads more often than desired.  Having been there and done that, if you want a reliable aircraft to "spend the rest of my life enjoying.." convert it to an O-200 before you fly it.

Jerry

On 10/19/2014 11:24 PM, kitfoxjeff@... [Q-LIST] wrote:
 

So I still havent even brought my q-2 to an airport yet. The plane is stored 30 miles from my home. at my parents house so I really get time to see that Bird. Whenever I have a free moment I drive 70 miles the opposite direction spend time with my kid Fox 3 and Cessna 172.

That q-2 is such a beautiful plane,.. Everytime I see it, I must sit down for a while and just stare at it's beautiful lines.

The engine only have seven hours on it. But one head is cracked from Tining a head boat too much. I purchased the aircraft in this condition. I am ordering new heads later this month. I hope to get this bird in the Air sometime next year. And I hope to spend the rest of my life enjoying it.

I can't help but to feel a bit afraid of the Revmaster 2100. I wonder if somebody can give me the right words to comfort me. And assure me that it is a good motor and it will not fail.

I wish I could pay somebody a few bucks to go over this injury that is familiar with these. Before I actually fly her.



Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
 

Yes. It's not a cut and paste conversion to the O200. But worth it. 

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID


"Jeff Sellars kitfoxjeff@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> wrote:

 

Thanks Jerry. I will seriously consider that. Is there any trimwork or modification of the cowling needed?





From: jnmarstall jnmarstall@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...>;
To: <Q-LIST@...>;
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Revmaster 2100
Sent: Mon, Oct 20, 2014 1:59:23 PM

 

Hello Jeff,
I am a former Revmaster flyer until the block cracked at 299.4 hrs over Bowling Green, KY.  Having now converted to the O-200, I can comfortably say that the Q200 is light years ahead in performance over the Revmaster and MUCH more reliable.  I know some people love their VW's ( I used to be one of those) but they will also tell you they spend a lot of time tinkering with valves and buying heads more often than desired.  Having been there and done that, if you want a reliable aircraft to "spend the rest of my life enjoying.." convert it to an O-200 before you fly it.

Jerry

On 10/19/2014 11:24 PM, kitfoxjeff@... [Q-LIST] wrote:
 

So I still havent even brought my q-2 to an airport yet. The plane is stored 30 miles from my home. at my parents house so I really get time to see that Bird. Whenever I have a free moment I drive 70 miles the opposite direction spend time with my kid Fox 3 and Cessna 172.

That q-2 is such a beautiful plane,.. Everytime I see it, I must sit down for a while and just stare at it's beautiful lines.

The engine only have seven hours on it. But one head is cracked from Tining a head boat too much. I purchased the aircraft in this condition. I am ordering new heads later this month. I hope to get this bird in the Air sometime next year. And I hope to spend the rest of my life enjoying it.

I can't help but to feel a bit afraid of the Revmaster 2100. I wonder if somebody can give me the right words to comfort me. And assure me that it is a good motor and it will not fail.

I wish I could pay somebody a few bucks to go over this injury that is familiar with these. Before I actually fly her.



Patrick Panzera
 

Can the Q2 handle the O-200?
I thought the canard had to be changed?

Pat

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Jerry Marstall jnmarstall@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

Yes. It's not a cut and paste conversion to the O200. But worth it. 

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID


"Jeff Sellars kitfoxjeff@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> wrote:

 

Thanks Jerry. I will seriously consider that. Is there any trimwork or modification of the cowling needed?





From: jnmarstall jnmarstall@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...>;
To: <Q-LIST@...>;
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Revmaster 2100
Sent: Mon, Oct 20, 2014 1:59:23 PM

 

Hello Jeff,
I am a former Revmaster flyer until the block cracked at 299.4 hrs over Bowling Green, KY.  Having now converted to the O-200, I can comfortably say that the Q200 is light years ahead in performance over the Revmaster and MUCH more reliable.  I know some people love their VW's ( I used to be one of those) but they will also tell you they spend a lot of time tinkering with valves and buying heads more often than desired.  Having been there and done that, if you want a reliable aircraft to "spend the rest of my life enjoying.." convert it to an O-200 before you fly it.

Jerry

On 10/19/2014 11:24 PM, kitfoxjeff@... [Q-LIST] wrote:
 

So I still havent even brought my q-2 to an airport yet. The plane is stored 30 miles from my home. at my parents house so I really get time to see that Bird. Whenever I have a free moment I drive 70 miles the opposite direction spend time with my kid Fox 3 and Cessna 172.

That q-2 is such a beautiful plane,.. Everytime I see it, I must sit down for a while and just stare at it's beautiful lines.

The engine only have seven hours on it. But one head is cracked from Tining a head boat too much. I purchased the aircraft in this condition. I am ordering new heads later this month. I hope to get this bird in the Air sometime next year. And I hope to spend the rest of my life enjoying it.

I can't help but to feel a bit afraid of the Revmaster 2100. I wonder if somebody can give me the right words to comfort me. And assure me that it is a good motor and it will not fail.

I wish I could pay somebody a few bucks to go over this injury that is familiar with these. Before I actually fly her.




Jerry Marstall
 

The q2 can be built with either the GU or LS1.  I built mine with the LS1.  I believe the O200 requires the LS1.

On Oct 20, 2014 11:17 AM, "Patrick Panzera editor@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

Can the Q2 handle the O-200?
I thought the canard had to be changed?

Pat

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Jerry Marstall jnmarstall@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

Yes. It's not a cut and paste conversion to the O200. But worth it. 

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID


"Jeff Sellars kitfoxjeff@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> wrote:

 

Thanks Jerry. I will seriously consider that. Is there any trimwork or modification of the cowling needed?





From: jnmarstall jnmarstall@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...>;
To: <Q-LIST@...>;
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Revmaster 2100
Sent: Mon, Oct 20, 2014 1:59:23 PM

 

Hello Jeff,
I am a former Revmaster flyer until the block cracked at 299.4 hrs over Bowling Green, KY.  Having now converted to the O-200, I can comfortably say that the Q200 is light years ahead in performance over the Revmaster and MUCH more reliable.  I know some people love their VW's ( I used to be one of those) but they will also tell you they spend a lot of time tinkering with valves and buying heads more often than desired.  Having been there and done that, if you want a reliable aircraft to "spend the rest of my life enjoying.." convert it to an O-200 before you fly it.

Jerry

On 10/19/2014 11:24 PM, kitfoxjeff@... [Q-LIST] wrote:
 

So I still havent even brought my q-2 to an airport yet. The plane is stored 30 miles from my home. at my parents house so I really get time to see that Bird. Whenever I have a free moment I drive 70 miles the opposite direction spend time with my kid Fox 3 and Cessna 172.

That q-2 is such a beautiful plane,.. Everytime I see it, I must sit down for a while and just stare at it's beautiful lines.

The engine only have seven hours on it. But one head is cracked from Tining a head boat too much. I purchased the aircraft in this condition. I am ordering new heads later this month. I hope to get this bird in the Air sometime next year. And I hope to spend the rest of my life enjoying it.

I can't help but to feel a bit afraid of the Revmaster 2100. I wonder if somebody can give me the right words to comfort me. And assure me that it is a good motor and it will not fail.

I wish I could pay somebody a few bucks to go over this injury that is familiar with these. Before I actually fly her.




Patrick Panzera
 

I believe the plane in question is already built as a Q2.
Are you recommending that he change the engine and canard to Q200?

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Jerry Marstall jerrylm1986@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

The q2 can be built with either the GU or LS1.  I built mine with the LS1.  I believe the O200 requires the LS1.

On Oct 20, 2014 11:17 AM, "Patrick Panzera editor@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

Can the Q2 handle the O-200?
I thought the canard had to be changed?

Pat

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Jerry Marstall jnmarstall@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

Yes. It's not a cut and paste conversion to the O200. But worth it. 

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID


"Jeff Sellars kitfoxjeff@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> wrote:

 

Thanks Jerry. I will seriously consider that. Is there any trimwork or modification of the cowling needed?





From: jnmarstall jnmarstall@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...>;
To: <Q-LIST@...>;
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Revmaster 2100
Sent: Mon, Oct 20, 2014 1:59:23 PM

 

Hello Jeff,
I am a former Revmaster flyer until the block cracked at 299.4 hrs over Bowling Green, KY.  Having now converted to the O-200, I can comfortably say that the Q200 is light years ahead in performance over the Revmaster and MUCH more reliable.  I know some people love their VW's ( I used to be one of those) but they will also tell you they spend a lot of time tinkering with valves and buying heads more often than desired.  Having been there and done that, if you want a reliable aircraft to "spend the rest of my life enjoying.." convert it to an O-200 before you fly it.

Jerry

On 10/19/2014 11:24 PM, kitfoxjeff@... [Q-LIST] wrote:
 

So I still havent even brought my q-2 to an airport yet. The plane is stored 30 miles from my home. at my parents house so I really get time to see that Bird. Whenever I have a free moment I drive 70 miles the opposite direction spend time with my kid Fox 3 and Cessna 172.

That q-2 is such a beautiful plane,.. Everytime I see it, I must sit down for a while and just stare at it's beautiful lines.

The engine only have seven hours on it. But one head is cracked from Tining a head boat too much. I purchased the aircraft in this condition. I am ordering new heads later this month. I hope to get this bird in the Air sometime next year. And I hope to spend the rest of my life enjoying it.

I can't help but to feel a bit afraid of the Revmaster 2100. I wonder if somebody can give me the right words to comfort me. And assure me that it is a good motor and it will not fail.

I wish I could pay somebody a few bucks to go over this injury that is familiar with these. Before I actually fly her.





Jerry Marstall
 

It might be easier to convert to a triq than build a canard.

On Oct 20, 2014 12:11 PM, "Patrick Panzera editor@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

I believe the plane in question is already built as a Q2.
Are you recommending that he change the engine and canard to Q200?

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Jerry Marstall jerrylm1986@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

The q2 can be built with either the GU or LS1.  I built mine with the LS1.  I believe the O200 requires the LS1.

On Oct 20, 2014 11:17 AM, "Patrick Panzera editor@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

Can the Q2 handle the O-200?
I thought the canard had to be changed?

Pat

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Jerry Marstall jnmarstall@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

Yes. It's not a cut and paste conversion to the O200. But worth it. 

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID


"Jeff Sellars kitfoxjeff@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> wrote:

 

Thanks Jerry. I will seriously consider that. Is there any trimwork or modification of the cowling needed?





From: jnmarstall jnmarstall@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...>;
To: <Q-LIST@...>;
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Revmaster 2100
Sent: Mon, Oct 20, 2014 1:59:23 PM

 

Hello Jeff,
I am a former Revmaster flyer until the block cracked at 299.4 hrs over Bowling Green, KY.  Having now converted to the O-200, I can comfortably say that the Q200 is light years ahead in performance over the Revmaster and MUCH more reliable.  I know some people love their VW's ( I used to be one of those) but they will also tell you they spend a lot of time tinkering with valves and buying heads more often than desired.  Having been there and done that, if you want a reliable aircraft to "spend the rest of my life enjoying.." convert it to an O-200 before you fly it.

Jerry

On 10/19/2014 11:24 PM, kitfoxjeff@... [Q-LIST] wrote:
 

So I still havent even brought my q-2 to an airport yet. The plane is stored 30 miles from my home. at my parents house so I really get time to see that Bird. Whenever I have a free moment I drive 70 miles the opposite direction spend time with my kid Fox 3 and Cessna 172.

That q-2 is such a beautiful plane,.. Everytime I see it, I must sit down for a while and just stare at it's beautiful lines.

The engine only have seven hours on it. But one head is cracked from Tining a head boat too much. I purchased the aircraft in this condition. I am ordering new heads later this month. I hope to get this bird in the Air sometime next year. And I hope to spend the rest of my life enjoying it.

I can't help but to feel a bit afraid of the Revmaster 2100. I wonder if somebody can give me the right words to comfort me. And assure me that it is a good motor and it will not fail.

I wish I could pay somebody a few bucks to go over this injury that is familiar with these. Before I actually fly her.





Jeff Sellars
 

My q2 already has the LS1 canard. So i think im ok with an o 200 conversion
.



From: Jerry Marstall jerrylm1986@... [Q-LIST] ;
To: ;
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Revmaster 2100
Sent: Mon, Oct 20, 2014 4:14:06 PM

 

It might be easier to convert to a triq than build a canard.

On Oct 20, 2014 12:11 PM, "Patrick Panzera editor@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

I believe the plane in question is already built as a Q2.
Are you recommending that he change the engine and canard to Q200?

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Jerry Marstall jerrylm1986@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

The q2 can be built with either the GU or LS1.  I built mine with the LS1.  I believe the O200 requires the LS1.

On Oct 20, 2014 11:17 AM, "Patrick Panzera editor@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

Can the Q2 handle the O-200?
I thought the canard had to be changed?

Pat

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Jerry Marstall jnmarstall@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

Yes. It's not a cut and paste conversion to the O200. But worth it. 

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID


"Jeff Sellars kitfoxjeff@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> wrote:

 

Thanks Jerry. I will seriously consider that. Is there any trimwork or modification of the cowling needed?





From: jnmarstall jnmarstall@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...>;
To: <Q-LIST@...>;
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Revmaster 2100
Sent: Mon, Oct 20, 2014 1:59:23 PM

 

Hello Jeff,
I am a former Revmaster flyer until the block cracked at 299.4 hrs over Bowling Green, KY.  Having now converted to the O-200, I can comfortably say that the Q200 is light years ahead in performance over the Revmaster and MUCH more reliable.  I know some people love their VW's ( I used to be one of those) but they will also tell you they spend a lot of time tinkering with valves and buying heads more often than desired.  Having been there and done that, if you want a reliable aircraft to "spend the rest of my life enjoying.." convert it to an O-200 before you fly it.

Jerry

On 10/19/2014 11:24 PM, kitfoxjeff@... [Q-LIST] wrote:
 

So I still havent even brought my q-2 to an airport yet. The plane is stored 30 miles from my home. at my parents house so I really get time to see that Bird. Whenever I have a free moment I drive 70 miles the opposite direction spend time with my kid Fox 3 and Cessna 172.

That q-2 is such a beautiful plane,.. Everytime I see it, I must sit down for a while and just stare at it's beautiful lines.

The engine only have seven hours on it. But one head is cracked from Tining a head boat too much. I purchased the aircraft in this condition. I am ordering new heads later this month. I hope to get this bird in the Air sometime next year. And I hope to spend the rest of my life enjoying it.

I can't help but to feel a bit afraid of the Revmaster 2100. I wonder if somebody can give me the right words to comfort me. And assure me that it is a good motor and it will not fail.

I wish I could pay somebody a few bucks to go over this injury that is familiar with these. Before I actually fly her.





Patrick Panzera
 

That sounds line a really long way to go about extending one's TBO.

How about buying the latest generation of Revmaster engines, the 2331cc R2300, that's worked out the issues of valve readjusting and block cracks from decades old R2100d engines? It also offers an additional 20 hp. 

Here's some info on it:

http://issuu.com/contact.magazine/docs/issue_104.5b.jpg

Pat

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 9:14 AM, Jerry Marstall jerrylm1986@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

It might be easier to convert to a triq than build a canard.

On Oct 20, 2014 12:11 PM, "Patrick Panzera editor@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

I believe the plane in question is already built as a Q2.
Are you recommending that he change the engine and canard to Q200?

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Jerry Marstall jerrylm1986@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

The q2 can be built with either the GU or LS1.  I built mine with the LS1.  I believe the O200 requires the LS1.

On Oct 20, 2014 11:17 AM, "Patrick Panzera editor@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

Can the Q2 handle the O-200?
I thought the canard had to be changed?

Pat

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Jerry Marstall jnmarstall@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

Yes. It's not a cut and paste conversion to the O200. But worth it. 

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID


"Jeff Sellars kitfoxjeff@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> wrote:

 

Thanks Jerry. I will seriously consider that. Is there any trimwork or modification of the cowling needed?





From: jnmarstall jnmarstall@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...>;
To: <Q-LIST@...>;
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Revmaster 2100
Sent: Mon, Oct 20, 2014 1:59:23 PM

 

Hello Jeff,
I am a former Revmaster flyer until the block cracked at 299.4 hrs over Bowling Green, KY.  Having now converted to the O-200, I can comfortably say that the Q200 is light years ahead in performance over the Revmaster and MUCH more reliable.  I know some people love their VW's ( I used to be one of those) but they will also tell you they spend a lot of time tinkering with valves and buying heads more often than desired.  Having been there and done that, if you want a reliable aircraft to "spend the rest of my life enjoying.." convert it to an O-200 before you fly it.

Jerry

On 10/19/2014 11:24 PM, kitfoxjeff@... [Q-LIST] wrote:
 

So I still havent even brought my q-2 to an airport yet. The plane is stored 30 miles from my home. at my parents house so I really get time to see that Bird. Whenever I have a free moment I drive 70 miles the opposite direction spend time with my kid Fox 3 and Cessna 172.

That q-2 is such a beautiful plane,.. Everytime I see it, I must sit down for a while and just stare at it's beautiful lines.

The engine only have seven hours on it. But one head is cracked from Tining a head boat too much. I purchased the aircraft in this condition. I am ordering new heads later this month. I hope to get this bird in the Air sometime next year. And I hope to spend the rest of my life enjoying it.

I can't help but to feel a bit afraid of the Revmaster 2100. I wonder if somebody can give me the right words to comfort me. And assure me that it is a good motor and it will not fail.

I wish I could pay somebody a few bucks to go over this injury that is familiar with these. Before I actually fly her.






Patrick Panzera
 

Ah, well there you go!

Pat

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Jeff Sellars kitfoxjeff@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

My q2 already has the LS1 canard. So i think im ok with an o 200 conversion
.



From: Jerry Marstall jerrylm1986@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...>;
To: <Q-LIST@...>;
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Revmaster 2100
Sent: Mon, Oct 20, 2014 4:14:06 PM

 

It might be easier to convert to a triq than build a canard.

On Oct 20, 2014 12:11 PM, "Patrick Panzera editor@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

I believe the plane in question is already built as a Q2.
Are you recommending that he change the engine and canard to Q200?

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Jerry Marstall jerrylm1986@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

The q2 can be built with either the GU or LS1.  I built mine with the LS1.  I believe the O200 requires the LS1.

On Oct 20, 2014 11:17 AM, "Patrick Panzera editor@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

Can the Q2 handle the O-200?
I thought the canard had to be changed?

Pat

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Jerry Marstall jnmarstall@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

Yes. It's not a cut and paste conversion to the O200. But worth it. 

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID


"Jeff Sellars kitfoxjeff@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> wrote:

 

Thanks Jerry. I will seriously consider that. Is there any trimwork or modification of the cowling needed?





From: jnmarstall jnmarstall@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...>;
To: <Q-LIST@...>;
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Revmaster 2100
Sent: Mon, Oct 20, 2014 1:59:23 PM

 

Hello Jeff,
I am a former Revmaster flyer until the block cracked at 299.4 hrs over Bowling Green, KY.  Having now converted to the O-200, I can comfortably say that the Q200 is light years ahead in performance over the Revmaster and MUCH more reliable.  I know some people love their VW's ( I used to be one of those) but they will also tell you they spend a lot of time tinkering with valves and buying heads more often than desired.  Having been there and done that, if you want a reliable aircraft to "spend the rest of my life enjoying.." convert it to an O-200 before you fly it.

Jerry

On 10/19/2014 11:24 PM, kitfoxjeff@... [Q-LIST] wrote:
 

So I still havent even brought my q-2 to an airport yet. The plane is stored 30 miles from my home. at my parents house so I really get time to see that Bird. Whenever I have a free moment I drive 70 miles the opposite direction spend time with my kid Fox 3 and Cessna 172.

That q-2 is such a beautiful plane,.. Everytime I see it, I must sit down for a while and just stare at it's beautiful lines.

The engine only have seven hours on it. But one head is cracked from Tining a head boat too much. I purchased the aircraft in this condition. I am ordering new heads later this month. I hope to get this bird in the Air sometime next year. And I hope to spend the rest of my life enjoying it.

I can't help but to feel a bit afraid of the Revmaster 2100. I wonder if somebody can give me the right words to comfort me. And assure me that it is a good motor and it will not fail.

I wish I could pay somebody a few bucks to go over this injury that is familiar with these. Before I actually fly her.






Jeff Sellars
 

I dont feel as much fear of an engine loss in my kitfox 3 as my approach speed is around 35 to 50 mph and i can put in down almost anywhere in 300 feet or so, but the Q? Coming down at 80 to 90 mph? That scares me.
My airport is surrounded by houses. So if an engine dies on takeoff i may be hitting rooftops or smashing through trees to hit the street in residential neighborhoods.
I need to know that i can count on my engine in my future flying Q.




From: Patrick Panzera editor@... [Q-LIST] To: Q-LIST ;
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Revmaster 2100
Sent: Mon, Oct 20, 2014 4:28:07 PM

 

Ah, well there you go!

Pat

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Jeff Sellars kitfoxjeff@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

My q2 already has the LS1 canard. So i think im ok with an o 200 conversion
.



From: Jerry Marstall jerrylm1986@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...>;
To: <Q-LIST@...>;
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Revmaster 2100
Sent: Mon, Oct 20, 2014 4:14:06 PM

 

It might be easier to convert to a triq than build a canard.

On Oct 20, 2014 12:11 PM, "Patrick Panzera editor@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

I believe the plane in question is already built as a Q2.
Are you recommending that he change the engine and canard to Q200?

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Jerry Marstall jerrylm1986@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

The q2 can be built with either the GU or LS1.  I built mine with the LS1.  I believe the O200 requires the LS1.

On Oct 20, 2014 11:17 AM, "Patrick Panzera editor@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

Can the Q2 handle the O-200?
I thought the canard had to be changed?

Pat

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Jerry Marstall jnmarstall@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

Yes. It's not a cut and paste conversion to the O200. But worth it. 

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID


"Jeff Sellars kitfoxjeff@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> wrote:

 

Thanks Jerry. I will seriously consider that. Is there any trimwork or modification of the cowling needed?





From: jnmarstall jnmarstall@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...>;
To: <Q-LIST@...>;
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Revmaster 2100
Sent: Mon, Oct 20, 2014 1:59:23 PM

 

Hello Jeff,
I am a former Revmaster flyer until the block cracked at 299.4 hrs over Bowling Green, KY.  Having now converted to the O-200, I can comfortably say that the Q200 is light years ahead in performance over the Revmaster and MUCH more reliable.  I know some people love their VW's ( I used to be one of those) but they will also tell you they spend a lot of time tinkering with valves and buying heads more often than desired.  Having been there and done that, if you want a reliable aircraft to "spend the rest of my life enjoying.." convert it to an O-200 before you fly it.

Jerry

On 10/19/2014 11:24 PM, kitfoxjeff@... [Q-LIST] wrote:
 

So I still havent even brought my q-2 to an airport yet. The plane is stored 30 miles from my home. at my parents house so I really get time to see that Bird. Whenever I have a free moment I drive 70 miles the opposite direction spend time with my kid Fox 3 and Cessna 172.

That q-2 is such a beautiful plane,.. Everytime I see it, I must sit down for a while and just stare at it's beautiful lines.

The engine only have seven hours on it. But one head is cracked from Tining a head boat too much. I purchased the aircraft in this condition. I am ordering new heads later this month. I hope to get this bird in the Air sometime next year. And I hope to spend the rest of my life enjoying it.

I can't help but to feel a bit afraid of the Revmaster 2100. I wonder if somebody can give me the right words to comfort me. And assure me that it is a good motor and it will not fail.

I wish I could pay somebody a few bucks to go over this injury that is familiar with these. Before I actually fly her.






Patrick Panzera
 

You should count on your flying ability more.
All engines are prone to failure- ALL of them.

I had a crank bust in half while on a missed approach, in a Cherokee 180 that had just come out of annual. 



On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:29 AM, Jeff Sellars kitfoxjeff@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

I dont feel as much fear of an engine loss in my kitfox 3 as my approach speed is around 35 to 50 mph and i can put in down almost anywhere in 300 feet or so, but the Q? Coming down at 80 to 90 mph? That scares me.
My airport is surrounded by houses. So if an engine dies on takeoff i may be hitting rooftops or smashing through trees to hit the street in residential neighborhoods.
I need to know that i can count on my engine in my future flying Q.




From: Patrick Panzera editor@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...>;
To: Q-LIST <Q-LIST@...>;
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Revmaster 2100
Sent: Mon, Oct 20, 2014 4:28:07 PM

 

Ah, well there you go!

Pat

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Jeff Sellars kitfoxjeff@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

My q2 already has the LS1 canard. So i think im ok with an o 200 conversion
.



From: Jerry Marstall jerrylm1986@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...>;
To: <Q-LIST@...>;
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Revmaster 2100
Sent: Mon, Oct 20, 2014 4:14:06 PM

 

It might be easier to convert to a triq than build a canard.

On Oct 20, 2014 12:11 PM, "Patrick Panzera editor@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

I believe the plane in question is already built as a Q2.
Are you recommending that he change the engine and canard to Q200?

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Jerry Marstall jerrylm1986@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

The q2 can be built with either the GU or LS1.  I built mine with the LS1.  I believe the O200 requires the LS1.

On Oct 20, 2014 11:17 AM, "Patrick Panzera editor@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

Can the Q2 handle the O-200?
I thought the canard had to be changed?

Pat

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Jerry Marstall jnmarstall@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

Yes. It's not a cut and paste conversion to the O200. But worth it. 

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID


"Jeff Sellars kitfoxjeff@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> wrote:

 

Thanks Jerry. I will seriously consider that. Is there any trimwork or modification of the cowling needed?





From: jnmarstall jnmarstall@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...>;
To: <Q-LIST@...>;
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Revmaster 2100
Sent: Mon, Oct 20, 2014 1:59:23 PM

 

Hello Jeff,
I am a former Revmaster flyer until the block cracked at 299.4 hrs over Bowling Green, KY.  Having now converted to the O-200, I can comfortably say that the Q200 is light years ahead in performance over the Revmaster and MUCH more reliable.  I know some people love their VW's ( I used to be one of those) but they will also tell you they spend a lot of time tinkering with valves and buying heads more often than desired.  Having been there and done that, if you want a reliable aircraft to "spend the rest of my life enjoying.." convert it to an O-200 before you fly it.

Jerry

On 10/19/2014 11:24 PM, kitfoxjeff@... [Q-LIST] wrote:
 

So I still havent even brought my q-2 to an airport yet. The plane is stored 30 miles from my home. at my parents house so I really get time to see that Bird. Whenever I have a free moment I drive 70 miles the opposite direction spend time with my kid Fox 3 and Cessna 172.

That q-2 is such a beautiful plane,.. Everytime I see it, I must sit down for a while and just stare at it's beautiful lines.

The engine only have seven hours on it. But one head is cracked from Tining a head boat too much. I purchased the aircraft in this condition. I am ordering new heads later this month. I hope to get this bird in the Air sometime next year. And I hope to spend the rest of my life enjoying it.

I can't help but to feel a bit afraid of the Revmaster 2100. I wonder if somebody can give me the right words to comfort me. And assure me that it is a good motor and it will not fail.

I wish I could pay somebody a few bucks to go over this injury that is familiar with these. Before I actually fly her.







Jay Scheevel
 

Hi Jeff,

 

If you decide to go to the O-200. I have the original QAC baffles (pre-cut) and the original QAC prop extension that you could probably talk me into selling, but not before I am convinced that you really need them. I think that Richard at FLAPS makes new cowls, but you would have to check with him on that. That would take care of most of your pre-made items for a conversion. New (oversized) mag box and extra bracing would be required and depending on clearances you may have to rework the header tank, which is not fun. After building the whole airplane (or at least getting close now after 30 years), the O-200 conversion sounds like a small project, but maybe I am just jaded. I can assure you that you have some great helpers in this group if you approach things carefully and take their advice to heart. By the way, I am installing a Jabiru J3300 which is why I don’t need the O-200 engine paraphernalia, but saying that usually evokes a few cat calls from the traditional Q-200 crowd, but puts me just shy of getting on Pat Panzera’s “good” list :-)

 

Cheers,

Jay Scheevel


Patrick Panzera
 

Anyone who likes airplanes, especially homebuilt ones is on my "good" list. :)

Pat

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 2:03 PM, 'Jay Scheevel' jay@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

Hi Jeff,

 

If you decide to go to the O-200. I have the original QAC baffles (pre-cut) and the original QAC prop extension that you could probably talk me into selling, but not before I am convinced that you really need them. I think that Richard at FLAPS makes new cowls, but you would have to check with him on that. That would take care of most of your pre-made items for a conversion. New (oversized) mag box and extra bracing would be required and depending on clearances you may have to rework the header tank, which is not fun. After building the whole airplane (or at least getting close now after 30 years), the O-200 conversion sounds like a small project, but maybe I am just jaded. I can assure you that you have some great helpers in this group if you approach things carefully and take their advice to heart. By the way, I am installing a Jabiru J3300 which is why I don’t need the O-200 engine paraphernalia, but saying that usually evokes a few cat calls from the traditional Q-200 crowd, but puts me just shy of getting on Pat Panzera’s “good” list :-)

 

Cheers,

Jay Scheevel



Mike Dwyer
 

My buddy runs a 3300 in his Arion Lightning.  He sets his cruise power to 5 GPH.  If you push the throttle all the way in he burns 12 GPH and doesn't go much faster.  I think the Bing(?) carbs are set to go crazy rich at full power.  I'm not a fan of that.  The engine has a head like a VW but each cyl has a head that you can pull off.  There is no head gasket, just an aluminum to aluminum fit - not a fan of that either.  If you pull off a head it's real tricky to get it back on without a leak.  With 150 hours on it he has already scored a piston on one cyl and had to send it off for rework.    

Data point of one but I feel the antique 0-200A is a much better engine.

Mike Q200 N3QP


On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 5:03 PM, 'Jay Scheevel' jay@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

Hi Jeff,

 

If you decide to go to the O-200. I have the original QAC baffles (pre-cut) and the original QAC prop extension that you could probably talk me into selling, but not before I am convinced that you really need them. I think that Richard at FLAPS makes new cowls, but you would have to check with him on that. That would take care of most of your pre-made items for a conversion. New (oversized) mag box and extra bracing would be required and depending on clearances you may have to rework the header tank, which is not fun. After building the whole airplane (or at least getting close now after 30 years), the O-200 conversion sounds like a small project, but maybe I am just jaded. I can assure you that you have some great helpers in this group if you approach things carefully and take their advice to heart. By the way, I am installing a Jabiru J3300 which is why I don’t need the O-200 engine paraphernalia, but saying that usually evokes a few cat calls from the traditional Q-200 crowd, but puts me just shy of getting on Pat Panzera’s “good” list :-)

 

Cheers,

Jay Scheevel



Patrick Panzera
 

For what it's worth, the Jab cylinders are 4140 chro-mo steel (machined from billet), not made from aluminum. They are however painted silver so maybe that's how they might be mistaken for aluminum. But the rust should be a giveaway. 


The Corvair uses cast iron cylinders and an aluminum head, and like the Jab, doesn't use a head gasket either.

Pat

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 2:40 PM, Mike Dwyer q2pilot@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

My buddy runs a 3300 in his Arion Lightning.  He sets his cruise power to 5 GPH.  If you push the throttle all the way in he burns 12 GPH and doesn't go much faster.  I think the Bing(?) carbs are set to go crazy rich at full power.  I'm not a fan of that.  The engine has a head like a VW but each cyl has a head that you can pull off.  There is no head gasket, just an aluminum to aluminum fit - not a fan of that either.  If you pull off a head it's real tricky to get it back on without a leak.  With 150 hours on it he has already scored a piston on one cyl and had to send it off for rework.    

Data point of one but I feel the antique 0-200A is a much better engine.

Mike Q200 N3QP


On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 5:03 PM, 'Jay Scheevel' jay@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

Hi Jeff,

 

If you decide to go to the O-200. I have the original QAC baffles (pre-cut) and the original QAC prop extension that you could probably talk me into selling, but not before I am convinced that you really need them. I think that Richard at FLAPS makes new cowls, but you would have to check with him on that. That would take care of most of your pre-made items for a conversion. New (oversized) mag box and extra bracing would be required and depending on clearances you may have to rework the header tank, which is not fun. After building the whole airplane (or at least getting close now after 30 years), the O-200 conversion sounds like a small project, but maybe I am just jaded. I can assure you that you have some great helpers in this group if you approach things carefully and take their advice to heart. By the way, I am installing a Jabiru J3300 which is why I don’t need the O-200 engine paraphernalia, but saying that usually evokes a few cat calls from the traditional Q-200 crowd, but puts me just shy of getting on Pat Panzera’s “good” list :-)

 

Cheers,

Jay Scheevel




Jeff Sellars
 

Hi Pat and everyone. Thanks for your input and all of the concerns on the private chats to.

I need to consider all option.

But if i end up doing a re-power, while spending all of that time and money, shouldn't I also see about getting the most bang for the buck in regards to power? HP? Perhaps more than just the 100 hp o200?

How well does the quickie do with a 120 hp in it?
I do have the LS1 canard and all of the upgrades. Balanced controls, sparrow strainers, ect.





From: Patrick Panzera editor@... [Q-LIST] ;
To: Q-LIST ;
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Re: Revmaster 2100
Sent: Mon, Oct 20, 2014 9:53:59 PM

 

For what it's worth, the Jab cylinders are 4140 chro-mo steel (machined from billet), not made from aluminum. They are however painted silver so maybe that's how they might be mistaken for aluminum. But the rust should be a giveaway. 


The Corvair uses cast iron cylinders and an aluminum head, and like the Jab, doesn't use a head gasket either.

Pat

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 2:40 PM, Mike Dwyer q2pilot@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

My buddy runs a 3300 in his Arion Lightning.  He sets his cruise power to 5 GPH.  If you push the throttle all the way in he burns 12 GPH and doesn't go much faster.  I think the Bing(?) carbs are set to go crazy rich at full power.  I'm not a fan of that.  The engine has a head like a VW but each cyl has a head that you can pull off.  There is no head gasket, just an aluminum to aluminum fit - not a fan of that either.  If you pull off a head it's real tricky to get it back on without a leak.  With 150 hours on it he has already scored a piston on one cyl and had to send it off for rework.    

Data point of one but I feel the antique 0-200A is a much better engine.

Mike Q200 N3QP


On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 5:03 PM, 'Jay Scheevel' jay@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

Hi Jeff,

 

If you decide to go to the O-200. I have the original QAC baffles (pre-cut) and the original QAC prop extension that you could probably talk me into selling, but not before I am convinced that you really need them. I think that Richard at FLAPS makes new cowls, but you would have to check with him on that. That would take care of most of your pre-made items for a conversion. New (oversized) mag box and extra bracing would be required and depending on clearances you may have to rework the header tank, which is not fun. After building the whole airplane (or at least getting close now after 30 years), the O-200 conversion sounds like a small project, but maybe I am just jaded. I can assure you that you have some great helpers in this group if you approach things carefully and take their advice to heart. By the way, I am installing a Jabiru J3300 which is why I don’t need the O-200 engine paraphernalia, but saying that usually evokes a few cat calls from the traditional Q-200 crowd, but puts me just shy of getting on Pat Panzera’s “good” list :-)

 

Cheers,

Jay Scheevel




Patrick Panzera
 

IMHO, the 120 hp Jab would get you there without much (if any) weight penalty, but there are cooling issues with the Jab 3300.

Otherwise getting that much power will cost you a lot of weight, or a lot of money as in the case of the Jab or UL engine. 

Even opting for the O-235 means a pretty hefty weight addition- as many as 70 pounds over the O-200, which is already heavier than the VW. 

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Jeff Sellars kitfoxjeff@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

Hi Pat and everyone. Thanks for your input and all of the concerns on the private chats to.

I need to consider all option.

But if i end up doing a re-power, while spending all of that time and money, shouldn't I also see about getting the most bang for the buck in regards to power? HP? Perhaps more than just the 100 hp o200?

How well does the quickie do with a 120 hp in it?
I do have the LS1 canard and all of the upgrades. Balanced controls, sparrow strainers, ect.





From: Patrick Panzera editor@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...>;
To: Q-LIST <Q-LIST@...>;
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Re: Revmaster 2100
Sent: Mon, Oct 20, 2014 9:53:59 PM

 

For what it's worth, the Jab cylinders are 4140 chro-mo steel (machined from billet), not made from aluminum. They are however painted silver so maybe that's how they might be mistaken for aluminum. But the rust should be a giveaway. 


The Corvair uses cast iron cylinders and an aluminum head, and like the Jab, doesn't use a head gasket either.

Pat

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 2:40 PM, Mike Dwyer q2pilot@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

My buddy runs a 3300 in his Arion Lightning.  He sets his cruise power to 5 GPH.  If you push the throttle all the way in he burns 12 GPH and doesn't go much faster.  I think the Bing(?) carbs are set to go crazy rich at full power.  I'm not a fan of that.  The engine has a head like a VW but each cyl has a head that you can pull off.  There is no head gasket, just an aluminum to aluminum fit - not a fan of that either.  If you pull off a head it's real tricky to get it back on without a leak.  With 150 hours on it he has already scored a piston on one cyl and had to send it off for rework.    

Data point of one but I feel the antique 0-200A is a much better engine.

Mike Q200 N3QP


On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 5:03 PM, 'Jay Scheevel' jay@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

Hi Jeff,

 

If you decide to go to the O-200. I have the original QAC baffles (pre-cut) and the original QAC prop extension that you could probably talk me into selling, but not before I am convinced that you really need them. I think that Richard at FLAPS makes new cowls, but you would have to check with him on that. That would take care of most of your pre-made items for a conversion. New (oversized) mag box and extra bracing would be required and depending on clearances you may have to rework the header tank, which is not fun. After building the whole airplane (or at least getting close now after 30 years), the O-200 conversion sounds like a small project, but maybe I am just jaded. I can assure you that you have some great helpers in this group if you approach things carefully and take their advice to heart. By the way, I am installing a Jabiru J3300 which is why I don’t need the O-200 engine paraphernalia, but saying that usually evokes a few cat calls from the traditional Q-200 crowd, but puts me just shy of getting on Pat Panzera’s “good” list :-)

 

Cheers,

Jay Scheevel





Jeff Sellars
 

Thanks. I do worry about weight especially because i weight 240 dry. And all of my friends and potential passengers are around the same if not more.



From: Patrick Panzera editor@... [Q-LIST] ;
To: Q-LIST ;
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Re: Revmaster 2100
Sent: Mon, Oct 20, 2014 10:28:23 PM

 

IMHO, the 120 hp Jab would get you there without much (if any) weight penalty, but there are cooling issues with the Jab 3300.

Otherwise getting that much power will cost you a lot of weight, or a lot of money as in the case of the Jab or UL engine. 

Even opting for the O-235 means a pretty hefty weight addition- as many as 70 pounds over the O-200, which is already heavier than the VW. 

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Jeff Sellars kitfoxjeff@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

Hi Pat and everyone. Thanks for your input and all of the concerns on the private chats to.

I need to consider all option.

But if i end up doing a re-power, while spending all of that time and money, shouldn't I also see about getting the most bang for the buck in regards to power? HP? Perhaps more than just the 100 hp o200?

How well does the quickie do with a 120 hp in it?
I do have the LS1 canard and all of the upgrades. Balanced controls, sparrow strainers, ect.





From: Patrick Panzera editor@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...>;
To: Q-LIST <Q-LIST@...>;
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Re: Revmaster 2100
Sent: Mon, Oct 20, 2014 9:53:59 PM

 

For what it's worth, the Jab cylinders are 4140 chro-mo steel (machined from billet), not made from aluminum. They are however painted silver so maybe that's how they might be mistaken for aluminum. But the rust should be a giveaway. 


The Corvair uses cast iron cylinders and an aluminum head, and like the Jab, doesn't use a head gasket either.

Pat

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 2:40 PM, Mike Dwyer q2pilot@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

My buddy runs a 3300 in his Arion Lightning.  He sets his cruise power to 5 GPH.  If you push the throttle all the way in he burns 12 GPH and doesn't go much faster.  I think the Bing(?) carbs are set to go crazy rich at full power.  I'm not a fan of that.  The engine has a head like a VW but each cyl has a head that you can pull off.  There is no head gasket, just an aluminum to aluminum fit - not a fan of that either.  If you pull off a head it's real tricky to get it back on without a leak.  With 150 hours on it he has already scored a piston on one cyl and had to send it off for rework.    

Data point of one but I feel the antique 0-200A is a much better engine.

Mike Q200 N3QP


On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 5:03 PM, 'Jay Scheevel' jay@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

Hi Jeff,

 

If you decide to go to the O-200. I have the original QAC baffles (pre-cut) and the original QAC prop extension that you could probably talk me into selling, but not before I am convinced that you really need them. I think that Richard at FLAPS makes new cowls, but you would have to check with him on that. That would take care of most of your pre-made items for a conversion. New (oversized) mag box and extra bracing would be required and depending on clearances you may have to rework the header tank, which is not fun. After building the whole airplane (or at least getting close now after 30 years), the O-200 conversion sounds like a small project, but maybe I am just jaded. I can assure you that you have some great helpers in this group if you approach things carefully and take their advice to heart. By the way, I am installing a Jabiru J3300 which is why I don’t need the O-200 engine paraphernalia, but saying that usually evokes a few cat calls from the traditional Q-200 crowd, but puts me just shy of getting on Pat Panzera’s “good” list :-)

 

Cheers,

Jay Scheevel