That's what I would do, esp as the Headwind is known to fly well using a smaller direct drive VW. Simple, known to work, relatively cheap: an aviation trifecta.Go with a direct drive VW. If you use a reduction drive its going to cost you a lot of added weight with the needed starter with a electrical system ,battery, etc.
VW don't have to spin 3000 rpm. My 1835 cc, VW engine in the high drag SSSC cruises at 80 mph at 2650/2700 rpm with a 60"x26" Culver prop burning 2.9/3.0 gph, with a 1200'+ ROC. Non-electric, 141 lb firewall forward weight.
Not right now. I have a 99% finished RV-10 in the garage that I need to push over the finish line.So are you really building a Headwind??
I think you are right. Looking at the generator stand I couldn't tell what it was and I didn't catch the other picture of the side mount fuel pump. No question , it's a 36 hp engine.
Unique is fun. It’s very cool to have an airplane that most pilots have never seen.Not right now. I have a 99% finished RV-10 in the garage that I need to push over the finish line.
After that is finished and flying (or even once it goes to the airport), I'll be looking for a "next" project. I enjoy having something to work on here at the house. The candidates include restarting a Hatz project I began many years ago, maybe building something truly low and slow like a Headwind, Fly Baby, or Currie Wot, or restoring an Aeronca. Of the three "really low and slow" homebuilts, the Wot "feels" like the most work and the least practical given I don't have a 1500' square grass field to operate from. The Headwind is probably the easiest to build and is certainly unique.