Alright, I derailed enough with the wood Bucker-looking replica.
As recompense, I submit this idea: an aluminum angle, riveted, VW-powered Monocoupe replica. Construction like a Texas Parasol was the drawer's intent.
Correction, I should have written Heinkel 74 not 71 in an earlier reply today, in case anyone was wondering how Ellie Beinhorn's long ranging low-wing monoplane could have influenced a Flitzer biplane evolution.:0)
I can't speak for anyone but myself, but there has never been any mention or inference by me about non-aerobatic.
Some people may have thought that any use of the word "replica" or "light weight" immediately equates to something less robust.
To clarify further, my intent was to discuss a fully aerobatic, accurate replica that happened to be built from aluminum tubes and riveted gussets, instead of 36 different sizes of telescopic steel tubes. I am fully aware that the original was a very efficient structure because of all that effort and tube sizing. But not many people could scratchbuild that, so I was hoping that a light aluminum tube structure might be an option.
Although the Verners are not sold as 'aerobatic' engines, maintaining a small amount of positive g throughout a simple aerobatic sequence would allow inside manoeuvres to be performed, including slightly barrelled slow rolls. However, a tank with a flop tube for fuel delivery is not too much of a problem to design and a method of providing inverted oil pressure might be based on such pioneering systems as that devised by Hal Krier in the 1950s.