burning holes in the sky

Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum

Help Support Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum:

rubber314chicken

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 24, 2008
Messages
49
With rising fuel prices, no one wants to use a 172 to go burning holes in the sky. What (homebuilt) planes would be great for that purpose. Only requirements are 2 seats and really low fuel consumption
 

Flying Monkey

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2008
Messages
52
With rising fuel prices, no one wants to use a 172 to go burning holes in the sky. What (homebuilt) planes would be great for that purpose. Only requirements are 2 seats and really low fuel consumption
Chinook plus2 with the HKS700e four stroke.

Aircraft Sales and Parts - Chinook HKS

That one you see there ( Canadian reg number C-IDZT ) on their website-and it's also on the HKS motor website-built in '05, is for sale -guy further up on the British Columbia coast. Transport Canada made him take the floats off ( barely over the weight for floats-Canadian Advanced Ultralight maximum gross is 1232 pounds,* two 170 pound occupants plus the full lotus floats is just under the Advanced Ultralight power to weight ratio spec-can fly floats with Chinook with the 80 hp Rotax 912 ) - HKS Chinook is 2 and a half gallons an hour fuel burn, though on wheels or skis.

Can't beat the HKS700 E for fuel consumption/torque ratio on the small planes.

Like some advanced ultralights, it's a draggy airplane-fun/cheap to fly, carries more load than a challenger, lands in rougher fields, better visibility, fuel consumption. Not a pretty plane ( I like it though ) -but you did say
Only requirements are 2 seats and really low fuel consumption
:)

Take 20-25% off that Canadian price if you're paying U.S dollars-canuck buck is less now....

*
Chris Heintz
( Zenith , Zodiak aircraft ) wrote the Canadian Advanced Ultralight standards after he moved from Europe to Canada and started making airplanes in Ontario ( as we know, he later moved operations to the United States-Mexico, Missouri-Ch701, 601 xl, 601 650, etc. ) He basically wrote them to include his then new plane-the Zodiac 601 UL (advanced ultralight in Canada) .

At that time, the advanced ultralight Canadian maximum gross was 1050 pounds-later it went to 1232 pounds-it then included his 601 HD and HDS-both 1232 pounds gross weight-and still, I think, his best planes ( also possibly along the lines of what you might be looking for ) .

The Canadian Advanced ultralight spec is roughly analogous to the U.S Sport Pilot spec-90 pounds more weight in U.S sport pilot -1320 pound gross versus Canadian 1232 gross.

The Canadian regs that Heinz was instrumental in writing are 30 pages long-story is that Heinz was helping write the then proposed sport pilot regs in the United States, he missed a meeting-so that reg went to 400 pages....:)

Youtube Chinook with HKS
 
Last edited:

addaon

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Feb 24, 2008
Messages
1,697
Location
San Jose, CA
There was a nice article on the Thorp T-211 / WAM-120 diesel combo, which (I believe) is currently available in kit form. Fuel consumption should be in the 3 gal/hour range.
 

Offcenter

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Messages
74
Location
New Jersey
I vote for the Challenger II. That's what I'm building. 3.5 gph on car gas. Over 4000 planes sold so parts are plentiful and so is internet help with your build. Two seats in tandem. Great for sightseeing.
 

cluxemburger

New Member
Joined
May 6, 2016
Messages
2
Location
Shelburne, ON, Canada
My vote is the Chinook Plus 2... Great airplane with lots of visibility and with out all the inherent issues the Challenger has (ie. Landing Gear, Vertical Stability, etc). With over 1100 flying - this is another great kit that you can't go wrong with.
 
Top